Goods and Services Tax : Madras HC rules failure to register under GST law constitutes deliberate tax evasion. Case highlights tax liability, penalties, an...
Goods and Services Tax : Bombay HC ruled that GST refund deficiencies must be communicated via Form GST RFD-03. Failure to issue it led to the refund appli...
Goods and Services Tax : Supreme Court upholds arrest powers under GST and Customs Acts, ensuring procedural safeguards to prevent misuse. Learn about the ...
Income Tax : Learn key updates in the New Income Tax Bill, 2025, effective April 2026. Covers tax year, compliance, deductions, international t...
Custom Duty : The Union Budget 2025 introduces changes in Customs duties, excise, and tax rates, focusing on tariff rationalization, support for...
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 : Karnataka High Court rules writ petitions cannot challenge tax intimations issued under Section 73(5) of CGST Act before a show ca...
Goods and Services Tax : Madras High Court rules IGST refund cannot be denied for exports qualifying as zero-rated supply, even when higher duty drawback r...
Goods and Services Tax : Delhi High Court rules that GST law does not prohibit fresh registration after cancellation. Assessee granted liberty to reapply u...
Goods and Services Tax : Andhra Pradesh High Court ruled that GST orders issued without a DIN are invalid, citing CBIC Circular and Supreme Court precedent...
Goods and Services Tax : Madras High Court rules that GST paid during detention can be claimed as a refund if excess tax is paid in regular returns. Key in...
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 ...
CESTAT held that the utilization of credit by any unit within the same entity would not cause any loss to the Exchequer. This is because the credit disallowed to one unit is proportionally made available to the second unit. From a company’s perspective, the net credit availed and utilized remains unchanged.
CESTAT, Kolkata made a significant ruling regarding the amendment in Rule 14 of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004. Previous version of the rule stated ‘taken or utilized,’ but it was modified to ‘taken and utilized.’ This alteration in wording clearly indicates the legislative intent to exclude the imposition of interest when the credit has been taken but not utilized.
CESTAT’s decision clarifies that since the rent received by individual co-owners is below the specified threshold, there is no basis for imposing service tax on these amounts.
In Kia Motors India Pvt. Ltd. vs State of Madhya Pradesh, the Madhya Pradesh High Court dismissed the writ, affirming GST on inter-state transport of demo vehicles between distinct persons, emphasizing compliance with CGST Act and Rules.
In the case of M/s. SHIDO Pharma v. Assistant Commissioner (ST), the Madras High Court quashed the order passed without providing an opportunity of hearing and directed the Revenue Department to conduct afresh proceedings.
The court deemed the show cause notice invalid as it failed to include essential details such as the date, time, and venue of the personal hearing
ITAT upheld the decision of the Commissioner, who had correctly deleted the addition made by the Assessing Officer. The Assessing Officer had added the differential margin to the assessee’s income based solely on a comparison between industry gross margin and the assessee’s gross margin, without conducting a thorough analysis of the assessee’s business strategy.
Calcutta High Court, in the case of M/s. Gargo Traders v. The Joint Commissioner, Commercial Taxes, held that a recipient of goods/services cannot be denied input tax credit (ITC) if the supplier becomes non-existent or their registration is retrospectively cancelled. The court directed the Revenue Department to consider the documents provided by the assessee to substantiate the genuineness of the transaction.
Madras High Court rejected the writ filed by the petitioner and instructed the assessee to pursue an appeal before the Appellate Authority. The High Court further directed the Appellate Authority to expedite the proceedings and resolve the case promptly.
CESTAT held that contract involving both supply of material and labour is a ‘Works Contract Service’ which was not taxable prior to June 1, 2007.
