 |
|
2022-TIOL-NEWS-254| October 31, 2022
|
|
|
Dear Member,
,Sending following links. Warm Regards,
TIOL Content Team
TIOL PRIVATE LIMITED.
For assistance please call us at + 91 7838594749 or email us at helpdesk@tiol.in. |
 |
|
|
|
|
TIOL AWARDS |
 |
|
|
 |
|
TODAY'S CASE (DIRECT TAX) |
|
|
|
|
|
INCOME TAX |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2022-TIOL-1242-ITAT-MUM
Wadhawa Constructions And Infrastructure Ltd Vs ACIT
Whether land in question is agricultural land and no tax is required to be deducted on purchase of land u/s 194IA of Act - YES : ITAT
- Assessee's appeal dismissed: MUMBAI ITAT
2022-TIOL-1241-ITAT-MUM
Suraksha DB Realty Vs DCIT
Whether assessee cannot be asked to produce more details then what is generally kept by assessee in relevant line of business - YES : ITAT
- Assessee's appeal partly allowed: MUMBAI ITAT
2022-TIOL-1240-ITAT-MUM
ITO Vs Smruti Ajay Singh
Whether the CIT (A) failed in examining the surrounding circumstances of the case while delivering the order- YES: ITAT
- Appeal allowed: MUMBAI ITAT
2022-TIOL-1239-ITAT-MUM
Sai Shipping Company Pvt Ltd Vs ITO
Whether if assessee has duly furnished all material facts it is for AO to decide manner of examining details and failure on part of AO, cannot be ground for reopening of assessment - YES : ITAT
- Assessee's appeal allowed: MUMBAI ITAT
2022-TIOL-1238-ITAT-MUM
Palm Court M Premises Cooperative Society Ltd Vs Pr.CIT
Whether interest income derived by co-operative housing society through investments made is entitled to deduction u/s 80P(2)(d) of Act - YES : ITAT
- Assessee's appeal allowed: MUMBAI ITAT
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TODAY'S CASE (INDIRECT TAX) |
|
|
|
|
|
GST CASE |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2022-TIOL-1366-HC-GUW-GST
Mayflower Hotels And Resorts LLP Vs Pr. Commissioner of State GST
GST - For failure to submit the returns for the year 2018 to the year 2021, the GST Registration was cancelled by the Assistant Commissioner by order dated 07.12.2021 - Appeal of the petitioner was also rejected by the Joint Commissioner by order dated 09.09.2022 on the ground that there was delay of more than 9 months in filing the appeal - Petition filed against this order. Held: As per the provisions of s.30 of the Act, the revocation application is to be made within thirty days from the date of service of the order of cancellation of registration - In the circumstance where the petitioner assessee is willing to file the returns and also pay all the tax dues including the interests and penalties etc. that may be leviable, the petitioner may have invoked a wrong provisions of filing an appeal under Section 107 of the AGST Act, 2017 - As the petitioner had acted diligently in seeking to avail the remedy under the law which although it may not have been the appropriate remedy under the circumstance, Bench is of the view that it would be a good cause for the respondents to consider as to whether the delay in making such application can be suitably condoned - Respondents to also keep in mind that it is in the public interest to have the benefits of all the taxes being paid by the taxpayers rather than preventing a taxpayer from further continuing their business for non-payment of taxes, which may, in other words, adversely affect the tax revenue of the state - Application be submitted by petitioner within fifteen days and thereafter the authorities may give due consideration within a period of another two months - Petition disposed of: High Court [para 6, 7, 8]
- Petition disposed of: GAUHATI HIGH COURT
2022-TIOL-1365-HC-ALL-GST
Ganga Steel Enterprises Vs State of UP
GST - A SCN for cancellation of registration under Rule 22(1) of the CGST Rules 2017 was issued by the respondent and the order cancelling the registration was passed on 13.03.2020 - Thereafter, another SCN dated 22.09.2021 for cancellation of registration was issued by the respondent no.4 and second order of cancellation was passed on 22.09.2021 - The application of the petitioner for revocation of the order of cancellation of registration was rejected by the respondents by a non speaking order dated 07.10.2021 - Under the circumstances the petitioner again moved an application for revocation of cancellation of registration on 29.10.2021 and thereupon a SCN dated 10.11.2021 has been issued which has been replied by the petitioner vide reply dated 17.11.2021 and yet the respondents are not taking any decision, therefore, the writ petition. Held: Respondents have admitted that the application for revocation of cancellation of registration is pending - More than ten months have passed but the respondents are not taking any decision on the application of the petitioner for revocation of cancellation of registration, on one pretext or the other - Writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondent concerned to decide the pending applications by a reasoned and speaking order, expeditiously, preferably within four months: High Court [para 4, 5]
- Petition disposed of: ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
2022-TIOL-123-AAR-GST
Rites Ltd
GST - Amount collected by the Applicant company as Notice Pay Recovery from the outgoing employee is not taxable under GST law: AAR GST - Amount of Surety Bond forfeited/encashed by the Applicant company from the outgoing contractual employee is not taxable under GST law: AAR GST - GST is not payable on nominal & subsidised recoveries made by the Applicant from its employees towards provision of canteen facility by 3 rd party service provider: AAR GST - Amount collected by the Applicant company from its employees in lieu of providing a new identity card (ID Card) is not chargeable to GST: AAR GST - Amount collected by the Applicant as liquidated damages for non performance/short- performance/delay in performance is not taxable: AAR GST - Amount forfeited by the Applicant company pertaining to Earnest Money, Security Deposit & Bank Guarantee is not chargeable to GST: AAR GST - Amount of Creditors balance unclaimed/untraceable and written off by the Applicant by way of crediting P&L Account is not taxable: AAR
- Application disposed of: AAR |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
INDIRECT TAX |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2022-TIOL-973-CESTAT-MUM
Apex International Vs CC
Cus - Sole issue for determination is scope for invoking detriment of confiscation under section 111(o) of Customs Act, 1962 with attendant penalty under section 112 of Customs Act, 1962 - Appellant had conceded inability to execute export orders within prescribed period and had, thus, not been in compliance with conditions in 'advance authorization scheme' elaborated in FTP issued under authority of FTDR Act, 1992 mirrored in Notfn 96/2009-Cus - First appellate authority had held the said breach as not attributable to malafide and, therefore, reduced the redemption fine and penalty thereon - The various schemes incorporated in FTP are administered, insofar as imports and exports are concerned, though notifications issued under section 25 of Customs Act, 1962 emplacing the same conditions including execution of bond for compliance and failing which duty foregone along with interest, is obliged to be deposited besides being liable to appropriate action under Customs Act, 1962 - Such stipulation is necessitated as, generally, period granted for fulfillment of export obligation lies well beyond the normal period of limitation prescribed in section 28 of Customs Act, 1962 - The authority to confiscate under section 111(o) of Customs Act, 1962 follows from the breach of specific conditions incorporated therein and which, in circumstances impugned herein, may arise only for non-fulfillment of conditions prescribed at the time of import that continues to be so - SCN has invoked section 143 of Customs Act, 1962 which provides for execution of bonds for ensuring fulfillment of conditions - It is, therefore, not a demand under section 28 of Customs Act, 1962 following allegation of short payment, non-payment or evasion of duties but for enforcing obligation under 'advance authorization scheme' of Foreign Trade Policy - Competent licensing authority had accorded closure in terms of scheme upon discharge of appropriate duty and interest thereon as prescribed in condition - Regularization is complete in all respects and it is only in absence of such regularization that proceedings under section 111(o) of Customs Act, 1962 could have been brought to conclusion - Thus, in effect, decisions of Tribunal in re Global Boards Ltd and re Maruti Udyog Ltd , pertaining to law on invoking of section 111(o) of Customs Act, 1962 in circumstances of imports having been regularised, must be followed - Impugned order is set aside: CESTAT
- Appeal allowed: MUMBAI CESTAT
2022-TIOL-972-CESTAT-AHM
Sanghi Industries Ltd Vs CCE
CX - This appeal has been filed by M/s. Sanghi Industries Limited against demand of reversal of cenvat credit - It is apparent from earlier order that both the issues were decided by Tribunal in its order and matter was remanded solely for purpose of quantification - Demand of reversal of cenvat credit on outward transportation is set aside - As per demand on cenvat credit in respect of which appellant could not produce the evidence of payment of duty in shape of invoice, same was confirmed by Tribunal and matter was remanded solely for purpose of quantification - The appellant has not challenged the quantification in so far as amount of Rs. 2,72,072/- is concerned, said demand is confirmed - Rule 15 of CCR, 2004 r/w Section 11(AC) of CEA, 1944 prescribes the penalty for availment of inadmissible or wrongful credit - Appellant admittedly taken credit without having documents consequently, penalty imposed under Rule 15 is revised from Rs.23,52,037/- to Rs.2,72,072/-.
- Appeal partly allowed: AHMEDABAD CESTAT
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NEWS FLASH |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Over 80 killed as 230-metre colonial-era suspension bridge in Gujarat caves in after recent repairs
Brazilians seal Bolsonaro's fate in ballots; Polls peacefully over on Sunday
Twin car bomb blasts in Somalia kill over 100 in capital
Covid lockdown - workers run away from iPhone's China factory
Switzerland makes record with world's longest 1.9km passenger train with 100 coaches chugging through Alps
Pelosi says family traumatised by hammer attacks
Iranian security forces teargas protesters
Halloween crowd surge death toll rises to 153 including 20 foreigners and an American
ISRO keen to join hands with industry to develop reusable rockets for heavier payloads
PM lays bricks for Tata-Airbus transport aircraft manufacturing in Vadodara
149 run out of breath in Seoul Halloween crowd surge; over 78 injured; President Yoon orders probe
Import of MEG - India launches anti-dumping probe
Russia walks out of Ukrainian grain exports arrangements after drone strikes its ships
HK Customs seizes meth haul worth USD 140 mn |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
GUEST COLUMN |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TIOL PRIVATE LIMITED.
TIOL HOUSE, 490, Udyog Vihar, Phase - V,
Gurgaon, Haryana - 122001, INDIA
Web: https://taxindiaonline.com
Email: updates@tiol.in
__________________________________
CONFIDENTIALITY/PROPRIETARY NOTE.
The Document accompanying this electronic transmission contains information from TIOL PRIVATE LIMITED., which is confidential, proprietary or copyrighted and is intended solely for the use of the individual or entity named on this transmission. If you are not the intended recipient, you are notified that disclosing, copying, distributing or taking any action in reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited. This prohibition includes, without limitation, displaying this transmission or any portion thereof, on any public bulletin board. If you are not the intended recipient of this document, please return this document to TIOL PRIVATE LIMITED. immediately |
|
|
|
