2022-TIOL-1074-ITAT-AHM

Ramniklal Nathabhai Patel Vs Pr.CIT

Whether any income arising from sale of properties 'owned by religious institutions but held by tenant for cultivation', is taxable in individual capacity on account of deemed ownership - YES: ITAT

- Assessee's appeal allowed: AHMEDABAD ITAT

2022-TIOL-1073-ITAT-RAJKOT

Dharti Estate Vs Pr.CIT

Whether power of revision u/s 263 warrants being exercised where AO has made due inquiries & where the order is neither erroneous nor prejudicial to revenue's interest - NO: ITAT

- Appeal allowed: RAJKOT ITAT

2022-TIOL-1072-ITAT-VARANASI

Geeta Gupta Vs ITO

Whether the adoption of net profit without bringing any comparable case of net profit as prevailing in the same trade / business is highly arbitrary and excessive - YES: ITAT

- Assessee's appeal partly allowed: VARANASI ITAT

2022-TIOL-1193-HC-AHM-GST

Balaji Enterprise Vs UoI

GST - Petitioner has submitted to seek retirement from matter and thereafter this Court has issued a notice upon petitioner - It was submitted that newly joined respondent No. 5 is owner of conveyance which is ordered to be confiscated vide order passed in Form No. GST MOV-11 and fine in lieu of confiscation of conveyance - It was submitted that conveyance which is ordered to be confiscated is only livelihood of respondent No. 5 - Respondent Nos.3 and 4 are directed to release conveyance only to respondent No. 5 on depositing the amount of Rs.3,16,350/- - It is clarified that aforesaid deposit shall be without prejudice to rights and contentions of respondent No. 5 to be raised in this petition: HC

- Petition disposed of: GUJARAT HIGH COURT

2022-TIOL-1192-HC-MP-GST

Prakash Enterprises Vs State of MP

GST - Issue involved is that due to technical glitches, petitioner was unable to file TRAN-1 during the time when portal was open - Petitioner has relied upon order in case of Filco Trade Centre Pvt. Ltd & Another 2022-TIOL-57-SC-GST , whereby apex Court in an attempt to resolve piquant situation prevailing around the nation where assessees were deprived due to technical glitche to avail filing of forms for availing Transitional Credit through TRAN-1 and TRAN-2, directed for opening of portal from 01.09.2022 to 31.10.2022 - Court directs that petitioner can avail said remedy made available by apex Court: HC

- Petition disposed of: MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT

2022-TIOL-1191-HC-MP-GST

Sapna Traders Vs CBIC

GST - Petitioner challenges the order dated 25.11.2021 and also seeks permission to allow filing of revision/rectification of Form TRAN-1 either electronically or manually. Held: Petition is disposed of in the light of the order passed by the Apex Court [ 2022-TIOL-75-SC-GST ] with liberty to the petitioner to avail the said benefit during the above period - If the petitioner submits an application in view of the direction given by the Apex Court from 01.09.2022 to 31.10.2022, then for 90 days given for adjudication to the authority, the respondents shall not insist for recovery [of tax and penalty] from the petitioner: High Court

- Petition disposed of: MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT

2022-TIOL-1190-HC-AHM-GST

Suraj Impex Vs UoI

GST - Petitioner firm filed TRAN-1, however, on account of technical error in the online portal, the same was not received and could not be filed resulting into loss of transition input tax credit to the tune of Rs. 51,95,606/- - Several letters to the jurisdictional authorities to allow carry forward of CENVAT credit met with no response, hence this petition. Held: Issue involved has been answered by the Apex Court in case Filco Trade Centre Pvt. Ltd and Anr . = 2022-TIOL-57-SC-GST and in terms of which the GSTN has been directed to open common portal for filing forms concerned for availing Transitional Credit through TRAN-1 and TRAN-2 for two months i.e. w.e.f. 01.09.2022 to 31.10.2022 - It goes without saying that the aforesaid decision of the Supreme Court shall govern the right of the parties - Petition is disposed of: High Court [para 5, 6, 6.1]

- Petition disposed of: GUJARAT HIGH COURT

2022-TIOL-1189-HC-AHM-GST

Mitansh Impex Vs State of Gujarat

GST - Petition is filed for setting aside communication dated 7.5.2022 along with Satisfactory Note/order dated 6.5.2022 whereby the Current Account No. 920020067484110 of the petitioner with the Axis Bank came to be attached - Allegations against the petitioner are that the department had reason to believe that M/s. Sabarmati Resources Limited (from whom petitioner had shown purchases and availed ITC) was engaged in bogus billing activities and that the said M/s. Sabarmati Resources Limited had undertaken such activity of issuance of invoices without the real movement of goods and thus the firm was a bogus firm – Owner of the petitioner firm is arrested and in judicial custody - Allegation is that the petitioner M/s Mitansh Impex wrongfully availed the input tax credit amounted to Rs. 6,10,511/-, interest of Rs. 91,526/- paid upto 5.5.2022 and penalty of Rs. 91,577/- totalling to Rs. 7,93,613/- was payable and, therefore, the current bank account of the petitioner came to be attached. Held : Arrears of tax is of Rs. 6,10,511/- plus the interest amount of Rs. 91,526/- and penalty of an amount of Rs. 91,577/- - court does not find any reasonableness in the submission of learned Assistant Government Pleader that the bank guarantee amount should cover the interest and penalty also, more particularly when the adjudicatory process against the petitioner is yet to complete - It would be just and proper to require the petitioner to submit the bank guarantee in respect of the tax amount of Rs. 6,10,511/-- This would adequately secure the tax amount for the department and further take care the interests of the revenue at this stage - Petition is allowed by setting aside the communication dated 7.5.2022 and the satisfactory note/order dated 6.5.2022 whereby the Current Account of the petitioner with the Axis Bank has been attached - The attachment shall be lifted on the condition that the petitioner furnishes to the competent authority of the respondent authority the bank guarantee for the amount equivalent to Rs. 6,10,511/-: High Court [para 5.1, 5.2, 6]

- Petition allowed: GUJARAT HIGH COURT

2022-TIOL-78-SC-CX-CB

Trimurthi Fragrances Pvt Ltd Vs Govt. of NCT of Delhi

CX - In view of Article 145(5) of the Constitution of India, concurrence of a majority of the judges at the hearing will be considered as a judgment or opinion of the Court - It is settled that the majority decision of a Bench of larger strength would prevail over the decision of a Bench of lesser strength, irrespective of the number of Judges constituting the majority - Numerical strength of the Judges taking a particular view is not relevant, but the Bench strength is determinative of the binding nature of the Judgment: Supreme Court Constitution Bench [para 19, H]

CX - There is no conflict between the Kothari Products line of cases and the Agra Belting line of cases - There being no conflict, the reference to Constitution Bench is incompetent - The cases may be placed for decision before the regular Bench - It is well settled that once goods are chargeable under the Additional Duties of Excise (Goods of Special Importance) Act 1957 [ADE Act], the State cannot levy sales tax on the same goods under a State enactment: Supreme Court CB [para 7, 17]

- Appeal disposed of: SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

2022-TIOL-79-SC-CT

Commissioner Trade Tax Vs Radico Khetan Ltd

Whether power of Sec 34 can be exercised only if transfer of immoveable property belonging to original assessee is made during pendency of any proceedings under U.P Trade tax Act and such transfer is found to be with intention to defraud any such tax and other dues - YES: SC

- Revenue's appeal dismissed: SUPREME COURT OF INDIA