Delhi High Court sets aside tax notices, ruling on Section 9(2)(g) of DVAT Act. Upholds right to Input Tax Credit for bona fide purchasers.
Delhi High Court sets aside Section 9(2)(g) of the DVAT Act, ruling it violates Articles 14 and 19(1)(g) by denying input tax credit to bona fide purchasers for seller’s default.
Delhi High Court held that since twin conditions required under section 45 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 [PMLA] has been satisfied, the application for grant of anticipatory bail allowed.
Delhi High Court ruled that bona fide buyers can’t be denied Input Tax Credit (ITC) for a seller’s failure to deposit VAT, reading down Section 9(2)(g) of DVAT Act.
Delhi High Court rules Section 9(2)(g) of DVAT Act is arbitrary for penalizing bona fide buyers for seller’s tax default. ITC is protected.
ITAT Mumbai held that as per previous provisions of section 68 of the Income Tax Act applicable till 31st March 2013, the assessee was not required to explain the source of money provided by the creditors.
ITAT Amritsar held that addition on protective basis in the hands of assessee not justified as bank account is fraudulently opened in his name without the assessee’s knowledge. Accordingly, appeal of assessee allowed and addition directed to be deleted.
Mumbai CAAR classifies a military-grade Tactical Hauler under CTH 8709 as a works truck and provides specific tariff classifications for its 13 components.
Himachal Pradesh High Court held that rejection of GST appeal without assigning specific reasons for the rejection thereof is not sustainable in law. Accordingly, matter restored back to Appellate Authority for denovo proceedings.
In re Orange Pet Nutrition Pvt. Ltd (CAAR Mumbai) A dispute concerning the customs classification of imported dog and cat food has emerged between M/s. Orange Pet Nutrition Private Limited and the Customs Authority for Advance Ruling (CAAR) in Mumbai. The core of the contention revolves around whether bulk-packaged pet feed should be classified as “dog […]
