SIGN IN SUBSCRIBE

News Update

Sale 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 surveysST - Since Department itself admits that service carried out by appellant is that of 'Mining Services' w.e.f. 01.06.2007, thus demand for earlier period has been made only to fasten excess Service Tax demand on appellant which cannot sustain: CESTATICG rescues fisherman with head injury onboard IFB St. Francis off the Gujarat coastCX - When physical stock verification carried out by Officers was not fool proof and there were anomalies, benefit of doubt should be extended to assessee, duty demand confirmed on alleged clandestine removal is not sustainable: CESTAT
 
Cost imposed by CESTAT - No reason to interfere - Revenue appeal dismissed: High Court

By TIOL News Service

CHANDIGARH, JUNE 03, 2016: NETIZENS may recall the order of CESTAT reported in 2015-TIOL-613-CESTAT-DEL wherein cost was imposed on the Adjudicating Authority for passing non-speaking order. The amount was directed to be deposited to the Prime Minister's Relief fund. Revenue carried the matter before the High Court with the following questions of law:

(i) Whether CESTAT is empowered to impose cost on the adjudicating authority?

(ii) Whether direction to deposit cost into the PM National Relief Fund is proper when it is not voluntary?

After hearing both sides, the High Court held:

+ The Tribunal had recorded that the analysis of the adjudicating authority was nothing but verbatim reproduction of the submission of the appellant and no finding was recorded about the taxability of services and the analysis/discussions/findings of the adjudication are very shoddy. It had been highly and conspicuously nonspeaking, non-reasoned, arbitrary and cavalier while passing the order dated 28.2.2013. The adjudicating authority had passed the order without application of mind and such orders adversely and severely impinge upon the public trust in the public authorities. It was further recorded that a public authority is such circumstances while performing quasi-judicial function deserves to be put to costs. Accordingly, the Tribunal imposed the cost of Rs. 25,000/- on the adjudicating authority who passed the order in question.

+ No illegality or perversity could be pointed out in the aforesaid findings recorded by the Tribunal which may warrant interference by this Court. Accordingly, no substantial question of law arises in this appeal.

(See 2016-TIOL-1055-HC-P&H-ST)


 RECENT DISCUSSION(S) POST YOUR COMMENTS
   
 
Sub: Commissioners - Pls stop trusting Juniors

I have known Late Gautam Bhatacharya, Principle Commissioner(Pune) as a very knowledgeable officer, grounded to earth despite his professional acumen and understanding of Service Tax, I am pained to see that he has been subjected to Cost because he trusted some stupid Superintendent/AC to draft the Order. Therefore, my request to all the Commissioners is ti stop trusting the Superintendents, AC'S and the Additional/Joint Commissioners as you all are aware of the mind set of your subordinates.

Posted by Anil Sood
 
Sub: adjudication

Yes it is a fact that the show cause notices,Order-in-originals and Order-in-appears are being issued by the competent authority as drafted by the subordinate. The authorities merely sign the SCNs and OIOs and OIAs as put up by the subordinate. Even the finds part are not dictated by the Issuing authority. The orders are being issued undiscerningly. They do not follow judicial discipline.

Posted by Anita Y
 

TIOL Tube Latest

TIOL Tube
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.

TOP NEWS

AR not Afar by SK Rahman

VISION 360



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

TII LATEST

TIOLCORPLAWS LATEST