News Update

Cus - When there is nothing on record to show that appellant had connived with other three persons to import AA batteries under the guise of declaring goods as Calcium Carbonate, penalty imposed on appellant are set aside: HCCongress fields Rahul Gandhi from Rae Bareli and Kishori Lal Sharma from AmethiCus - The penalty imposed on assessee was set aside by Tribunal against which revenue is in appeal is far below the threshold limit fixed under Notification issued by CBDT, thus on the ground of monetary policy, revenue cannot proceed with this appeal: HCGST -Since both the SCNs and orders pertain to same tax period raising identical demand by two different officers of same jurisdiction, proceedings on SCNs are clubbed and shall be re-adjudicated by one proper officer: HCFormer Jharkhand HC Chief Justice, Justice Sanjaya Kumar Mishra appointed as President of GST TribunalSale of building constructed on leasehold land - GST implicationI-T - If assessee is not charging VAT paid on purchase of goods & services to its P&L account i.e., not claiming it as expenditure, there is no requirement to treat refund of such VAT as income: ITATBengal Governor restricts entry of State FM and local police into Raj BhawanI-T - Interest received u/s 28 of Land Acquisition Act 1894 awarded by Court is capital receipt being integral part of enhanced compensation and is exempt u/s 10(37): ITATCops flatten camps of protesting students at Columbia UnivI-T - No additions are permitted on account of bogus purchases, if evidence submitted on purchase going into export and further details provided of sellers remaining uncontroverted: ITATTurkey stops all trades with Israel over GazaI-T- Provisions of Section 56(2)(vii)(a) cannot be invoked, where a necessary condition of the money received without consideration by assessee, has not been fulfilled: ITATGirl students advised by Pak college to keep away from political eventsI-T- As per settled position in law, cooperative housing society can claim deduction u/s 80P, if interest is earned on deposit of own funds in nationalised banks: ITATApple reports lower revenue despite good start of the yearI-T- Since difference in valuation is minor, considering specific exclusion provision benefit is granted to assessee : ITATHome-grown tech of thermal camera transferred to IndustryI-T - Presumption u/s 292C would apply only to person proceeded u/s 153A and not for assessee u/s 153C: ITATECI asks parties to cease registering voters for beneficiary-oriented schemes under guise of surveys
 
ST - For determining whether appeal was filed in time, merely by taking date of dispatch as date of communication of order does not appear to be proper - As vital aspect not properly considered, Appeal restored: CESTAT

By TIOL News Service

MUMBAI, MAY 18, 2016: A miscellaneous application was filed for restoration of the appeal which was dismissed by the Tribunal as non-maintainable on the ground that the appeal was filed before the Commissioner (Appeals) beyond the stipulated time period of 60 + 30 = 90 days.

The appellant submitted that they were not represented and on the date of hearing, 20.03.2015, they had requested for adjournment. Inasmuch as the order was passed ex-parte by the Tribunal. Furthermore, the Commissioner (Appeals) had dismissed the appeal as time barredby taking the date of dispatch of the order as a date of communication of the o-in-o. It is the submission of the appellant that the order said to have been dispatched on 18.04.2013 was not received by the appellant and subsequently they had requested the department for issuance of the duplicate order copy which they have received on 5.7.2013 and thereafter the appeal was filed on 23.08.2013 i.e. within normal period of 60 days, therefore, the appeal was not time barred when presented before the Commissioner (Appeals).

The AR strongly objected for restoration of the appeal.

The Bench observed -

"4. …I find that this Tribunal has passed the order without representation or without appearance on behalf of the appellant despite the adjournment request which was not recorded. Further, on going through the finding of the ld. Commissioner (Appeals), I find that the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) has taken the date of dispatch of the order as a date of communication. The ld. Commissioner also admitted that the appeal was filed against the order copy issued by the department on request of the appellant. However, the delivery of the order dispatched on 18.04.2013 and acknowledgement thereof has not been verified by the Commissioner (Appeals), therefore, merely by taking the date of dispatch as the date of communication of the order does not appear to be proper. Since the vital aspect has not been properly considered, the appeal deserves to the restored…."

The appeal was restored to its original number.

(See 2016-TIOL-1177-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.