CASE LAWS
2016-TIOL-562-HC-DEL-IT
Vip Growth Fund Pvt Ltd Vs DCIT: DELHI HIGH COURT (Dated: March 17, 2016)
Whether for the purpose of reassessment, AO is confined to the recorded reasons to support the assumption of jurisdiction, it is not open for the Court to gather from the records the material/information which would support the reasons as communicated to the assessee by the Revenue - YES: HC
Assessee's appeal allowed
2016-TIOL-561-HC-DEL-VAT
Siemens Ltd Vs Department Of Trade And Taxes: DELHI HIGH COURT (Dated: March 16, 2016)
Whether in case an assessee has already paid the tax and interest, can he be denied the benefit available under the Amnesty Scheme only because penalty is the subject matter of a challenge made by the assessee before Appellate Tribunal - NO: HC
Assessee's appeal allowed
2016-TIOL-560-HC-ALL-CT
Vadilal Enterprises Ltd Vs State Of Up: ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT (Dated: January 8, 2016)
Whether the goods mentioned in the certificate of registration granted u/s 8(3)(b) of CST if purchased from outside the State of U.P, is entitled to concessional rate of tax upon issuance of Form-C by the AO - YES: HC
Whether a registered dealer is entitled to issuance of Form 'C', if he purchases goods from outside the State and the said goods are mentioned in the registration certificate issued u/s 8(3)(b) of CST - YES: HC
Whether application made by a dealer for issuance of Form 'C' can be denied on the ground of amendment of registration certificate, in case the said applications are pending prior to the amendment of registration certificate - NO: HC
Assessee's petition allowed
2016-TIOL-559-HC-DEL-VAT
Tata Power Delhi Distribution Ltd Vs CST: DELHI HIGH COURT (Dated: March 11, 2016)
Whether a transaction of lease occasioning the movement of goods from one state to another, which was an inter-state 'deemed' sale, could be declared to be an intra-state sale, in case the goods are located within the state at the time of transfer of the right to use the goods - NO: HC
Whether it can be said that the situs of the sale is where the agreement to sell is entered, if the goods are available in the State and the agreement for transfer of the property in goods from the seller to the buyer is executed at that place - YES: HC
Assessee's appeal allowed
2016-TIOL-558-HC-MAD-VAT
Nokia India Sales Pvt Ltd Vs ACCT: MADRAS HIGH COURT (Dated: July 15, 2015)
Whether an entity being a SEZ unit, is entitled to exemption from levy of purchase tax on the interstate stock transfer effected from warehouse located in SEZ, in case the assessee is not authorised for carrying out such transfer within SEZ - NO: HC
Assessee's petition dismissed
2016-TIOL-557-HC-KOL-IT
Nalco Chemicals India Ltd Vs CIT: CALCUTTA HIGH COURT (Dated: March 10, 2016)
Whether the industrial undertaking formed by transfer of previously used plant & machinery to a new business, can be denied deduction u/s 80I, where the value of machinery or plant so transferred does not exceed 20% of the total value of the machinery or plant used in the new business - NO: HC
Whether the mere fact that the assessee did not qualify for deduction u/s 80I during initial years, can be a ground to deny such benefit in subsequent years if the assessee has set up new plant at different place and also fulfills the terms and conditions stipulated under the said provision - NO: HC
Assessee's appeal allowed
2016-TIOL-556-HC-PATNA-ST
Shapoorji Paloonji And Company Pvt Ltd Vs CESTAT: PATNA HIGH COURT (Dated: March 3, 2016)
ST - The petitioner, engaged in the business of execution of works contract, was appointed as contractor for construction of academic complex of Indian Institute of Technology (IIT) by National Building Construction Corporation Ltd. vide letter of award, dated 20.12.2012 - ST was paid by the petitioner - Indian Audit and Account Department raised audit objection on 30th June, 2015 to the effect that service provider undertaking construction activity of educational institutions are not required to pay service tax - consequently, the petitioner claimed that ST is not payable by them or by IIT, respondent no.4, on the construction activity, undertaken by the petitionerand claimed refund of tax paid - revenue of the view that IIT, a body corporate under a Central Statute would not be covered under the category of negative list and also by the exemption notification no.25/2012 dated 20.6.2012, as it is not a Governmental Authority within the meaning of notification no.2/2014 dated 30.1.2014 - appeal to CESTAT.
Writ Petition allowed
2016-TIOL-555-HC-MUM-CX
Sikkim Ferroys Alloys Ltd Vs ACCE: BOMBAY HIGH COURT (Dated: March 14, 2016)
CX – Revenue must adopt appropriate proceedings - it cannot threaten coercive measures and directly seek to recover money from petitioners without any prior adjudication - reliance on the order passed by this Court and which is also an interim order in arbitration proceedings, as between the petitioners and respondent No.2, will not enable the revenue to issue such notice to recover the amount straightway - the sums due to the Government would have to be ascertained and thereafter sub-section (2) of section 11 of the Central Excise Act will come into play - the impugned notice quashed and set aside - the writ petition allowed in the above terms : HIGH COURT [para 9, 10, 11]
Writ Petition allowed
PROMOTION
CBDT promotes 250 officers as JCITs; calls for options on promotion
REPORT
Report of the Committee on Taxation of E-Commerce
