Explore Andhra Pradesh High Court’s analysis of sufficient cause for delay in filing a GST appeal and the interpretation of Section 107(4) of CGST Act.
CESTAT Chennai held that Diffused Silicon Wafer does not have capacity to perform the essential function of a Solar Cell and hence it cannot be classified under specific heading of Solar Cell i.e., CTH 8541 4011. However, Diffused Silicon Wafer can be classified under CTH 8541 9000 as parts of semi-conductor device.
Read how Pandey Traders successfully appealed a GST ruling, classifying their product under Ch-2401 of GST Tariff, based on specific processes as outlined in Explanatory Note.
CESTAT Ahmedabad rules in favor of Adani Power, confirming Commissioner (Appeals) authority to remand matters to Adjudicating Authority under Section 35 A of Central Excise Act.
CESTAT Ahmedabad ruled that construction of new buildings or civil structures as turnkey projects falls under Works Contract Service. Analysis of Kirti Infrastructures Ltd case.
ITAT Mumbai’s decision in Shyamnarayan Trades Pvt Ltd vs ITO clarifies deductibility of interest on property loans, addressing loan repayment and share purchase.
ITAT Ahmedabad’s decision in Gunvantbhai Chhitubhai Nayak vs ITO emphasizes re-adjudication of a case with due consideration of evidence, after finding the CIT(A)’s order lacking in merits.
CESTAT Chennai rules that the refund of unutilised Cenvat Credit for a sold factory is not allowable. Alfred Berg & Co. Vs Commissioner of GST & CE explained.
Bombay High Court lifts travel ban on Aarti Ramesh Chaurasia due to LOC issued by Income Tax Dept. Find details of the case and the judgment here.
Department contended that such services, even when provided by foreign banks, fall under the category of banking and financial services as per the Finance Act, 1994. Therefore, they claimed that the service tax should be imposed on the appellant as the recipient of these services.