News Update

GST - Appellate Authority has not noticed the provisions of Section 12 of the Limitation Act, 1963 which mandates that the day on which the judgment complained of was pronounced, is also to be excluded: HCGST - If the Proper Officer was of the view that the reply filed was insufficient, he could have sought more clarification - Without providing any such opportunity, impugned order could not have been passed - Matter remanded: HCGST - Notice requiring petitioner to furnish additional information/clarification does not mention that petitioner had to appear for personal hearing - Since no opportunity of personal hearing was given, order is unsustainable: HCGST - For the purposes of DNB and FNB courses, petitioner clearly falls within the scope of an educational institution imparting education to students enrolled with it as a part of a curriculum - Services exempted: HCGST - Candidates appearing for the screening tests are not students of the petitioner - Petitioner's claim of exemption on such examination fees is unmerited: HCGST - NEET examinations are in the nature of an entrance examination - Petitioner would be entitled to the benefit of an exemption by virtue of Serial No.66(aa) of the 2017 Notification, which came into effect on 25.01.2018: HCBrisk voting reported from all 96 LS seats; PM casts vote in AhmedabadIndia calls back half of troops stationed at MaldivesIndia-Australia DTAA: Economic Statecraft through TaxRBI alerts against misuse of banking channels for facilitating illegal forex tradingTime Limit to file Appeal in GST Appellate TribunalEC censures Jagan Reddy & Chandrababu Naidu for MCC violationsI-T-Interest income earned by a co-operative society on its investments held with a cooperative bank would be eligible for claim of deduction under Sec.80P(2)(d) of the Act: ITATFrance tells Xi Jinping EU needs protection from China’s cheap importsI-T- Addition cannot be made merely for reason that assessee got property transferred through registered sale without making payment to vendor: ITATUK military personnel’s data hackedI-T- Addition which is not based on the reasons for reopening is un-sustainable sans notice u/s 148 of the ACT: ITATOxygen valve malfunction delays launch of Boeing’s first crewed spacecraftI-T- Re-assessment need not be resorted to, where no income has escaped assessment or where no evidence is put forth to establish escapement of income: ITATPulitzer prize goes to Reuters & NYTFM administers Oath to Justice Sanjaya Kumar Mishra as first President of GST TribunalDutch, Belgian students join Gaza sit-ins by US Univ studentsI-T- Penalty imposed u/s 271(1)(c) are not sustainable where additions based on which penalty was imposed, are themselves set aside : ITATGhana agrees to activate UPI links in 6 monthsECI calls for ethical use of social media platforms by political partiesCus - Technological innovation and advancements would result in obsolescence of raw materials imported duty free - Destruction of such imports allowed after intimation to Customs authority: CESTATED seizes about 20 kg gold from locker of a cyber scammer in HaryanaMinistry of Tourism participates in Arabian Travel Mart 2024 in DubaiST - No evidence has been adduced to negate the specific findings of adjudicating authority holding that the service tax on all these expenses, by including same in gross transaction value has been discharged by assessee: CESTATICG detains Iranian boat, with six Indians onboard, off Kerala coastCX - As assessee is able to prove that all the items in question have been used in fabrication of structures for installation of capital goods which were ultimately used in manufacture of their final product, CENVAT Credit is allowed to assessee: CESTAT
 
CX - Applicant issuing duty paying invoices without supplying goods - consignee taking CENVAT - case settled by Settlement Commission - contention that penalty not imposable in such circumstance is prima facie not sustainable: CESTAT

By TIOL News Service

MUMBAI, JULY 25, 2013: AGAINST an o-in-o passed by the CCE, Thane-II imposing a penalty of Rs.25 lakhs under Rule 26(2)(i) of the CER, 2002, the applicant is before the CESTAT with a Stay application.

The penalty is imposed on the ground that the applicants issued duty paying invoices without supplying the goods to M/s Arrow Engineers and M/s Arrow Engineers availed credit without receipt of the inputs.

Incidentally, against the proceedings initiated against M/s Arrow Engineers for recovery of the CENVAT credit allegedly fraudulently availed, the assessee M/s Arrow Engineers approached the Settlement Commission and settled the dispute by payment of appropriate duty and penalties.

So, the applicant in the present case submits that as the dispute in respect of M/s Arrow Engineers, the main noticee, is settled by the Settlement Commission, therefore, the imposition of penalty on the present applicant is not sustainable.

The Bench observed -

“5. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances, as the admitted facts are that the applicants issued invoices on the strength of which credit has been availed without receiving the inputs, therefore, we find that it is not a case for total waiver of pre-deposit of the penalty. However, taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case, the applicants are directed to deposit Rs.12,50,000/- (Rupees Twelve lakhs fifty thousand only) within a period of eight weeks and report compliance on 11.09.2013. On deposit of the aforesaid amount, the pre-deposit of the remaining penalty is waived and recovery thereof stayed during the pendency of the appeal.”

In passing : See Majority decision in S.K.Colombowala 2007-TIOL-1130-CESTAT-MUM.

(See 2013-TIOL-1122-CESTAT-MUM)


POST YOUR COMMENTS
   

TIOL Tube Latest

Shri N K Singh, recipient of TIOL FISCAL HERITAGE AWARD 2023, delivering his acceptance speech at Fiscal Awards event held on April 6, 2024 at Taj Mahal Hotel, New Delhi.


Shri Ram Nath Kovind, Hon'ble 14th President of India, addressing the gathering at TIOL Special Awards event.