CESTAT Mumbai’s ruling in Arcelor Mittal case, classifying procuring sales orders for foreign steel mills serving customers in India as an export of service, leading to the quashing of a service tax demand.
Kerala High Court’s ruling in Mina Bazar vs. State Tax Officer-1 emphasizes that Input Tax Credit (ITC) cannot be denied solely due to GSTR 2A and 3B discrepancies.
ITAT acknowledged that individuals like the appellant, often women with limited income sources, should be spared from the strenuous process of income tax assessments, especially when dealing with small amounts.
In the case of ACIT vs. Avaya India Pvt. Ltd., ITAT Delhi excludes Infosys from the list of comparables under the software development services segment.
In the case of Kanav Metals vs. ITO, ITAT Delhi rules that there can be no protective addition in the absence of a substantive addition. Read the full analysis.
In the case of Hariyana Trading Co. vs. State of Bihar, Patna High Court grants stay on demand if 20% is deposited, considering the non-constitution of the Tribunal.
Dive into the CESTAT Chennai case of S. Thiagarajan vs. Commissioner of G.S.T. & Central Excise. Explore how the penalty under Section 78 cannot be sustained on a tax demand with retrospective amendments.
Explore the CESTAT Chennai order in the case of Chemplast Sanmar Ltd. vs. Commissioner of GST & Central Excise regarding CENVAT credit on capital goods in a Marine Terminal Facility (MTF).
Discover the legal proceedings in the case of M/s Sainath Clearing Agency, where the CESTAT Mumbai revokes a customs broker license and imposes a penalty, offering insights into the disciplinary actions against customs brokers
Learn about the Bombay High Court’s ruling on the State Tax Officer’s authority to block ITC Ledger and the implications for businesses. Get the full judgment here.
