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 ...
B K Sales Corporation (Appellant) was appointed as consignment agent by way of an Agreement by Narmada Chematur Petrochemicals Ltd. (principal). In terms of the Agreement, the principal was required to supply their product duly packed in drums on regular basis to the Appellant
The CBEC has issued an instructions vide letter F. No. 296/185/2014-CX.9 dated September 30, 2014 to all CCs and DGs on its action plan to evolve Non-adversarial indirect tax administration for the benefit of trade, industry and other stakeholders, whereby certain initiatives are being undertaken as follows: Punctuality: Officers are advised to maintain the appointed […]
The Hon’ble Tribunal in absence of any discussion with regard to mala fide intention and mens rea set aside the OIO to the extent it related to imposition of penalty under Section 78 of the Finance Act.
The Department received an anonymous complainant indicating therein that during the period February 9, 1993 to September 27, 1995 about 3839.350 MT ordinary Portland cement was illegally sold which involved Excise Duty amounting to Rs.7,20,154/-, by using parallel documents like GP1s, invoices, challans , Bills, cash memo and GRs, etc.
In the instant case, General Export Enterprises (Appellant) had exported consignment of manmade fabrics. During the course of the investigation, the gram per square meter (GSM) values declared by the Appellant were found to be misdeclared but the goods were allowed to be exported
The Hon’ble Madras High Court observed that the Petitioner was granted a time period of 8 years to fulfil the export obligations. However, the Department had initiated the proceedings before the expiry of stipulated period of 8 years. Therefore, the Hon’ble High Court held that initiation of proceedings in such a case was completely arbitrary and faulty.
The Cenvat Credit on plastic crates were used for safe transportation of finished goods is allowable even it is not being used in or in relation to the manufacture of final products CCE, Noida Vs. Denso India Ltd. & Another [2014 (9) TMI 635 – Allahabad High Court] Denso India Ltd. & Another (the Respondent) […]
Commissioner of Central Excise, Pune-II Vs. Mishal Zinc Industries Pvt. Ltd. and Indo Deutsh Metallo Chemique Ltd. [2014-TIOL1 725-CESTAT-MUM] The Respondents are manufacturer of White Zinc Oxide and having two units (a) Mishal Zinc Industries Pvt. Ltd (the Unit 1) and (b) Indo Deutsch Metallo Chimique Ltd (the Unit 2) [the Respondents]. Till August 1998, […]
The Central Board of Excise and Customs has issued an instruction F. No. 6/8/2014- CX.1 dated September 17, 2014 in terms of the judgment of the Apex Court in case of Super Synotex India Ltd. [2014-TIOL-19-SCCX] on the issue of abatement of Sales Tax under an abatement scheme where the Assesse has been allowed to […]
In the instant case, Essar Projects Ltd. (Essar) sold the entire business pertaining to their ‘Construction Division’ to Essar Construction (I) Ltd. (the New Company), w.e.f. June 30, 2006 as per ‘Business Transfer Agreement’. The Department contended that amount received by the New Company on account of the services rendered post June 30, 2006, though the entire Service tax liability pertaining to these services had already been discharged by Essar, the New Company is liable to pay Service tax on same. The Department issued Show Cause Notice to the New Company and the demand was confirmed by the Adjudicating authority.
