Goods and Services Tax : The Gujarat High Court examined whether a taxpayer’s selection of “No” for personal hearing could override the statutory req...
Goods and Services Tax : The Orissa High Court examined whether tax could be demanded after reversal of the disputed ITC. It held that raising a fresh dema...
Goods and Services Tax : The Rajasthan High Court examined whether GST registration could be refused due to non-filing of returns in another State. It held...
Goods and Services Tax : The Supreme Court stayed a judgment that held mere uploading of notices and orders on the GST portal does not amount to valid comm...
Goods and Services Tax : The Supreme Court refused to bypass the statutory GST appeal mechanism and directed the taxpayer to pursue appellate remedies. How...
Goods and Services Tax : Explore Supreme Court's scrutiny of whether supplying cranes for services like loading, unloading, lifting, and shifting qualifies...
Goods and Services Tax : Explore the case of Pradeep Kanthed v. Union of India where the Supreme Court issues notice to the Finance Ministry regarding the ...
Goods and Services Tax : Commissioner of Central Goods And Service Tax & Ors Vs Safari Retreats Private Limited & Ors (Supreme Court of India) The ...
Goods and Services Tax : The 45th meeting of Goods and Services Tax Council (“GST Council”) is scheduled to be held on September 17, 2021. The Ministry...
Custom Duty, Income Tax : The Karnataka High Court in M/s Pellagic Food Ingredients Private Ltd. v. Union of India [Writ Petition No. 14737/2021[T-CUS] issu...
Goods and Services Tax : The Gujarat High Court ruled that the Supreme Court’s COVID-19 limitation exclusion must be considered while computing timelines...
Goods and Services Tax : The Delhi High Court held that exoneration under Section 73 does not automatically bar proceedings under Section 74 because both p...
Goods and Services Tax : The Supreme Court has agreed to consider whether a single GST show cause notice can cover multiple financial years under Section 7...
Goods and Services Tax : The Supreme Court took up a challenge to Section 16(2)(c) of the CGST Act where ITC was denied despite tax having been paid by the...
Goods and Services Tax : The Supreme Court prima facie observed that Section 67(4) permits sealing of premises only when access is denied. It issued notice...
Excise Duty : Notification No. 32/2015-Central Excise Dated- 4th June, 2015 Ethanol produced from molasses generated from cane crushed in the ...
Service Tax : Circular No. 184/3/2015-ST Dated the 3rd June, 2015 It is further clarified that exemption from service tax still continues to ser...
Custom Duty : the floods in the State of Jammu and Kashmir (the State) from whole of the duty as specified under the First Schedule and whole of...
Excise Duty : Grants exemption from Basic Excise Duty to goods donated or purchased out of cash donations for the relief and rehabilitation of p...
Custom Duty : New posts have been created in the rank of Commissioners of Customs in DRI and DGCEI for adjudication of cases as investigated by ...
Method of computation of value U/R 6(3A) of the Credit Rules in respect of Input services used for trading cannot be applied for period prior to April 1,2011 – Value to be calculated on proportionate turnover basis. Synise Technologies Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Pune [2015-TIOL-1036-CESTAT-MUM]
he Hon’ble High Court of Bombay held that Rule 3 and 4 of the Credit Rules provide that any Input or Capital goods received in the factory or any Input service received by manufacturer of final product would be susceptible to Cenvat credit.
The Uttar Pradesh State Government vide the Notification No. K.A. NI-2-729/XI-9(235)12-U.P. Act-5-2008-Order-(133)-2015 dated June 1, 2015 amended Entry 52 of the Schedule – I of the Uttar Pradesh Value Added Tax ACT, 2008 (the UP Vat Act) and exempted all kinds of Footwear including hawai chappals and straps thereof with Maximum Retail Price (the MRP) not exceeding rupees Rs. 300/- per pair subject to the condition that the MRP is indelibly marked or embossed on the footwear itself.
Tax calendar for the month of June, 2015 Due Date Period Event Form Return under the Central Excise Act, 1944 10-June-15 May -2015 Excise Return by Non SSI Unit ER-1 10-June-15 May -2015 Excise Return by EOUs ER-2 10-June-15 May -2015 Excise Return by Units paying duty more than Rs. 1 Crore (CENVAT + PLA) […]
Pre-condition for invoking the extended period is that the Commissioner should record ‘reasons to believe’ that the tax has not been paid and that the reason for non-payment of tax should be concealment, omission or failure to disclose full material particulars on the part of the assessee.
The Hon’ble High Court of Delhi held that imposition of fine under Section 70(5) of the DVAT Act is for an offence as defined under Section 3(38) of the General Clauses Act, 1897 which shall be tried by the Hon’ble Court of criminal jurisdiction in accordance with Section 26(b) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The Commissioner or its delegates do not have power or jurisdiction to impose such fine.
The Hon’ble High Court of Bombay held that the Appellant cannot be said to be aggrieved by the said Assessment Order and consequently, filling of any appeal would not arise. Accordingly, the Appellant is entitled for refund.
The Hon’ble Supreme Court held that it was not case of wilful misstatement, since all the facts and manner were disclosed in letter addressed to the Department. Hence, extended period could not be invoked.
No reversal of Cenvat credit on inputs in case of slump sale of on-going factory along with raw materials, packing materials etc., as there is no removal from factory.
In the instant case, Sanjay Industrial Corporation (the Appellant) was engaged in profile cutting viz. cutting larger size plates into small size and shapes using gas cutting machines, as per requirements of customers. The Department invoked extended period of limitation alleging that the process carried out by Appellant amount to manufacture and thus exigible to Excise duty.
