TODAY'S CASE (INDIRECT TAX)

July 31, 2024

++ Cus - Mis-declared goods - No credible material as to make out a prima facie case against the applicant so as to warrant his custodial interrogation - Bench is inclined to protect liberty of applicant: HC

++ Cus - Shipping bill filed incorrectly - RoDTEP Scheme claim not ticked Petitioner be permitted to amend shipping bills online on customs automated system by making suitable technical deviation: HC

July 30, 2024

++ GST - ITC - Finding returned by appellate authority appears to be verbatim reproduction of the observations made by adjudicating authority - Order suffers from non-application of mind and is perverse: HC

++ GST - ITC availment - Applicant, CFO, has cooperated in the investigation - Directors of the company have been already released on bail - Discretion can be exercised in favour of grant of bail: HC

++ GST - Inverted duty structure - Refund of ITC - Appellate authority allowed Revenue appeal by relying on Circular 135 of 2020 which Circular has been held to be in conflict with s.54(3)(ii) - Order set aside and matter remanded: HC

++ GST - Pedantic approach by Commr (A) - Even if TRAN-1 is filed in September, 2017, since it is approved, such credit is to be treated as existing on 01.07.2017 - Refund of unutilized ITC available for July/August 2017 exports: HC

++ GST - No reasons are assigned for levying interest and penalty - Orders quashed and matter remanded: HC

++ GST - Refund - Deficiency memo - Rectification does not constitute a fresh application: HC

++ CX - The CENVAT Credit cannot be denied to appellant without any corroborative evidence being brought on record by Revenue: CESTAT

++ ST - Transitional credit being vested right cannot be taken away on procedural or technical ground: CESTAT

July 29, 2024

++ GST - Doctors' club under tax net - Challenge to the constitutionality of s.7(1)(aa) is dismissed, however, it would have prospective operation w.e.f. 01.01.22: HC

++ CX - Rebate claims filed before Supdt . instead of AC, CX were returned and re-submitted to the Asstt . Commr . after a month - Claims rejected on ground of time bar - Law of limitation is only procedural: HC

++ ST - Petitioner allocated expenditures on its own project so as to justify viability of project undertaken and for achieving its objects but did not charge the reimbursable expenditures from any person for rendering services - No tax leviable: HC

++ GST - Amount paid is admittedly paid as a self-assessment, which the petitioner was not required to pay - Refund could not have been rejected on the ground of limitation under Section 54(1) of the CGST Act: HC

++ GST - Transitional credit - Benefit can be claimed only in the manner provided in the statute, as a credit, or not at all and not in any event as a refund in cash: HC

++ Cus - CESTAT has clearly committed a patent illegality in construing suspension to be a penalty; in effect, has handed down an order of suspension in perpetuity: HC

++ ST - The deposit made by appellant towards pre-deposit under Section 35 of Central Excise Act, 1944 by way of DRC-03 cannot be accepted: CESTAT

++ Cus - Since the Battery Fuse Units are 'Automatic Circuit Breakers' rightly classifiable under Chapter Heading 8536, question of extending the benefit of Notfn 25 /2005 as 'Parts' of transmission apparatus does not arise: CESTAT

++ ST - When no action has been initiated by Department on letter wherein information of non-payment of Service Tax was intimated by appellant, suppression of fact with intention to evade payment of tax does not exist: CESTAT

July 27, 2024

++ ST - Once the activity of appellant that is of forfeituring the amount of earnest money is not a declared service, question of retaining said money as consideration for rendering such service becomes absolutely redundant: CESTAT

July 26, 2024

++ Misc - Royalty not a tax; royalty is contractual consideration paid by mining lessee to lessor for enjoyment of mineral rights & liability to pay royalty arises out of contractual conditions of mining lease: SC CB

++ Misc - Payments made to Government cannot be deemed to be a tax merely because statute provides for their recovery as arrears: SC CB

++ Misc - Since power to tax mineral rights is provided for in Entry 50 of List II, Parliament cannot use its residuary powers in this subject matter: SC CB

++ Cus - Owner of goods has a liability to pay customs duty even after confiscated goods are redeemed on payment of fine - Interest follows: SC

++ VAT - burden of proof lies with Department to verify & approve refunds to ultimate taxpayers: HC

++ ST - Appellant is entitled to avail CENVAT Credit on re-insurance of motor vehicles and credit availed by it during relevant period from April, 2011 to March, 2012 on this score were all admissible credit: CESTAT

++ ST - As there is no positive act established against appellant with regard to suppression of facts, the period being transitional period, invocation of extended period was set aside: CESTAT

++ Cus - Assessee-company is not liable to pay interest on deferential Customs duty arising out of the final assessment of bills of entry: CESTAT

++ CX - Cenvat credit of input services as per Rule 6(5) of CCR 2004, is allowed, even if such services are partly used for exempted businesses: CESTAT

++ Cus - Department has not established any positive act on the part of appellant in regard to suppression of facts with intent to evade Customs duty, no grounds found for invocation of extended period, demand of CVD along with interest and imposition of penalties cannot sustain: CESTAT

++ CX - Refund of pre-deposit is governed by Section 35FF of Central Excise Act, 1944 and rate of interest is governed by statutory provisions and notifications issued in this regard, appellants are entitled for payment of interest as per provisions of Section 35FF and at the rate prescribed therein: CESTAT

July 25, 2024

++ Cus - Adjudication proceedings initiated on the ground of 'illegal export' whereas seizure was on the belief that there is 'illegal import' - Clear lack of jurisdiction: HC

++ Cus - An assessee cannot be deprived of its justifiable money - Refund to be granted along with interest @8%, although Act provides interest @6% - Difference of 2% to be recovered from officers responsible and mention be made in their service records - Cost of Rs.1 lakh also payable: HC

++ Cus - It is settled law that Tribunal cannot travel beyond the scope of relief and the case made out in the show cause notice: HC

++ Cus - RoSCTL Scheme - Right accrued pursuant to any law and/or Scheme in favour of the person cannot be denied merely due to any technical error and/or glitch: HC

++ ST - Not only is the assessee a PSU but also if the tax had been paid on reverse charge basis, they would have been entitled to take credit - Net effect is the exercise is revenue neutral - Tribunal rightly set aside the penalty: HC

++ GST - Refund of IGST paid on goods exported - An Assessee cannot be deprived of its justifiable money - Petitioner ought to be compensated for such deprivation - Interest to be paid @6%: HC

++ GST - DRC-01 was not accompanied by SCN - Order passed - Violation of principles of natural justice - Orders set aside and matter remanded: HC

++ GST - When an adverse order is to be passed, the same has to be passed after giving an opportunity of personal hearing and in absence thereof, such order deserves to be quashed: HC

++ Cus - Appellant is not liable to pay safeguard duty on electrical insulators of glass which is imposed by Notfn 5/2012-Cus as on date of entry inward of import goods, said Notification had not come into force: CESTAT

July 24, 2024

++ CX - Final product is copper cathodes and not sulphuric acid, which is a by-product - Oxygen gas captively consumed in manufacture of sulphuric acid is entitled to exemption in terms of notification 67/95-CE: HC

++ GST - Same input and output supplies though attracting different tax rates at different points of time - Since para 3.2 of Circular 135 has been struck down as ultra vires, refund to be extended: HC

++ GST - Demand confirmed since petitioner failed to file a reply - Petitioner can be given one opportunity to explain subject to they depositing 25% of disputed tax from its Electronic Cash register: HC

++ GST - Petitioner's assertion that the ITC available in GSTR-2A exceeds that availed of in GSTR-3B was not considered - Matter remanded; bank attachment lifted: HC

++ GST - Legitimate trade and commerce by every supplier should be allowed to be carried on subject to payment of tax and statutory compliance - Registration to be revived: HC

++ GST - Petitioner unaware of SCNs and the orders passed - Subject to petitioner depositing 25% of disputed tax, matter remanded: HC

++ CX - Since goods have been imported and received at factory of appellant, photocopies of Bills of Entry are supported by certificate for loss of original as well as certificate issued by customs authorities for payment of duty, appellant is eligible for credit: CESTAT

++ ST - As per CBEC Circular No. 555/51/2000-CX.1 dated 19.10.2000, where amended provision u/s 11A is invoked to demand duty, it will have retrospective operation: CESTAT

July 23, 2024

++ Cus - For a HNW individual, an expensive watch of 'Rolex' make would be his personal effect but same may not be the case if the person is of mere means - Pendant studded with diamonds not liable for confiscation: HC

++ GST -  Even if no date, time or place of hearing is indicated in the notice issued, it was the duty of assessee to file his reply to SCN, which was admittedly received - Plea regarding violation of principles of natural justice cannot be countenanced: HC

++ GST - Mismatch between value of e-way bills generated on portal and returns filed in Form GSTR-3B - Petitioner did not provide a comprehensive explanation - To remit sum of Rs.3.50 crores within six weeks - Matter remanded: HC

++ GST - Rule 30 of Rules, 2017 - Assessing officer ought to have issued summons and obtained clarification rather than estimating the outward supply value at 110% of purchase value - Order set aside and matter remanded subject to remit of 10% disputed tax demand: HC

++ GST - Net ITC shown incorrectly - An inadvertent error was committed and such error was rectified, albeit irregularly, however, sum recovered from petitioner's bank account - Order set aside and matter remanded: HC

++ GST - Since notification is declared unconstitutional, Amount of IGST paid pursuant to Entry No. 10 of Notification No. 10 of 2017 is to be refunded along with statutory interest: HC

++ GST - Rule 86A(3) - Petitioner prays for setting aside the action of blocking  available ITC - By operation of law itself, the restriction imposed has lapsed: HC

++ CX - Since the assessee continued to be recognized as a manufacturer of excisable goods, taking of MODVAT credit in terms of Rule 57A ibid is proper and justified and same cannot be denied under Rule 57I ibid: CESTAT

July 22, 2024

++ Sales Tax - AO can re-open assessment proceedings for the relevant period, where no permission for such exercise was taken from the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal: HC

++ Cus - It would always be open to appellant to raise the issue reagrding denial of cross-examination, once the final order is passed by Principal Commissioner: CESTAT

++ Cus - Once the classification is decided under CTH 3902, sub heading notes becomes relevant for classification within the heading 3902, question of change of classification from CTH 3902 to 3906 on strength of sub-heading note does not arise: CESTAT

++ Cus - Once CA certificate is produced and in absence of any allegation of fraud or collusion, such certificate is sufficient to grant the refund claim: CESTAT

++ ST - Electricity charges were being collected on actual basis and being submitted to electricity department, same cannot be liable to service tax: CESTAT

++ CX - Revised return is to be filed electronically and requirement of law is filing of revised return within time which the appellant has done, therefore refund is duly admissible to appellant especially when substantial conditions have been fulfilled : CESTAT

July 20, 2024

++ CX - Even if some description is wrongly mentioned in invoice, remedy for department lies with taking action against service provider but for that reason Cenvat credit on recipient cannot be denied: CESTAT

++ CX - Since the insurance premium was paid by owner of vessel and collected the same from appellant, credit on cost of transportation of their own goods and Service Tax paid on such insurance premium should be available to appellant: CESTAT

++ CX - Demands raised u/r 6(3) of CCR 2004 quashed, where assessee's claims of having used separate inputs for manufacturing both dutiable & exempted items, are not considered: CESTAT

July 19, 2024

++ GST - Order does not specifically deal with any of the contentions raised by petitioner in his reply to SCN - Order set aside and matter remanded: HC

++ GST - SCN did not indicate any date, time or venue for the personal hearing - Order passed is without complying with principles of natural justice, therefore, set aside - Registration restored - Petitioner to file returns and clear tax dues along with penalty etc : HC

++ GST - Respondent concluded that sufficient documents were not submitted - Petitioner cannot be completely absolved of responsibility for not providing a proper clarification - Matter remitted subject to petitioner depositing 10% of disputed tax demand: HC

++ GST - During personal hearing, some explanation was given by petitioner, however, there is no proper discussion in order - Case remitted subject to petitioner depositing 10% of disputed tax: HC

++ GST - Cancellation of registration - Procedural aspects should be looked into by the authority concerned very scrupulously and diligently - Order set aside and matter remanded: HC

++ GST - Unutilized ITC under VAT Act should be refunded along with statutory interest since petitioner has already reversed the credit in the Electronic Credit Ledger: HC

++ CX - Notfn . 1/93-CE - Single partnership firm having two factories - Two different partnership deeds entered into for claiming ineligible benefit - Clearances of both units to be clubbed for deciding SSI exemption: HC

++ CX - Tribunal has an inherent power to prevent the right of appeal being abused by an appellant who keeps back till the stage of appeal, points of law or fact which he could have raised before the lower authority: CESTAT

++ CX - Normal rule is that in any litigation the rights and obligations of the parties are adjudicated upon as they obtain at the commencement of the lis : CESTAT

July 18, 2024

++ GST - No indication in either s.61 or s.73 that scrutiny of returns and the issuance of notice in Form ASMT-10 constitute a mandatory pre-requisite for adjudication even in cases where returns were scrutinized: HC

++ GST - Cancellation of registration - SCN is bereft of details; mere formality and an eyewash - Assessing Officer to issue fresh SCN with particulars of reasons, incorporated with details and thereafter to provide reasonable opportunity of hearing: HC

++ CX - Rule 6 of the CCR is not enacted to extract illegal amount from assessee - Amount which is to be recovered shall not be more than credit attributed to the input/input services used in exempted goods: HC

++ Service - If both the proceedings are allowed to proceed simultaneously, then delinquent employee will have to disclose his defence in the disciplinary proceedings thereby prejudicing his case in the criminal proceedings - Disciplinary proceedings shall remain stayed: HC

++ CX - Ammonium Sulphate being a by-product arising out of manufacture of final product namely, Potassium Cyanide and Sodium Cyanide, same will not be liable for payment of an amount in terms of Rule 6(3) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004: CESTAT

++ CX - Substantive benefit of MODVAT Credit cannot be denied on the ground of procedural lapses, appellant is eligible for MODVAT Credit on the basis of challans-cum-invoices issued by depots of M/s. SAIL: CESTAT

++ ST - Since there was no consideration in this case, the Tribunal had concluded that the same should not be held liable for service tax: CESTAT

July 17, 2024

++ Cus - An application cannot be rejected u/s 6 of the RTI Act, 2005 but could have been rejected only on the grounds available u/s 8: HC

++ Cus - Notfn . 84/97-Cus - Project Authority certificate was issued by state govt. belatedly and, therefore, goods were imported upon payment of duty under protest - Respondent authority ought to have re-assessed the BE and granted benefit of exemption - Customs duty to be refunded with interest: HC

++ Cus - Since the penalties imposed, which were set aside by the Tribunal, have been paid by respondent(s) without prejudice and to put an end to litigation, appeals of Revenue are rendered infructuous: HC

++ ST - SVLDRS, 2019 - Amount of pre-deposit is to be reduced from the amount payable after extending relief of 60%: HC

++ VAT - Director of a company cannot be made liable for VAT dues owed by a company, where no legal provisions exist which enable the VAT Department to recover dues in this manner: HC

++ Cus - Since the appellant have paid duty along with interest before issuance of SCN, under intimation to department for waiver of SCN, case is squarely covered by section 28(2) according to which department would not suppose to issue any SCN, no penalty could have been imposed: CESTAT

++ Cus - Burden rests with Customs Department to verify authenticity of Certificate of Origin submitted by importer: CESTAT

July 16, 2024

++ GST - Order does not set out any reasons for rejecting the petitioner's response to the Show Cause Notice - Matter remanded for consideration afresh: HC

++ GST - Cancellation of registration - Erroneous template used for orders - No reply filed by petitioner but order mentions otherwise - Matter remanded: HC

++ GST - SCN issued before portal was re-designed - SCN was uploaded under the category of Additional Notices which was not easily accessible - Order set aside and matter remanded: HC

++ ST - Trade facilitation - Pre-show cause notice consultation by the Principal Commissioner/Commissioner prior to issue of SCN in cases involving demands of duty above Rs.50 lakhs is mandatory: HC

++ CX – CENVAT Credit cannot be denied on vague allegations at the end of manufacturing unit without disputing the credit availed by Input Service distributor: CESTAT

++ ST - Since the appellant is not liable to pay service tax on Export Pass Fee, Adjudicating authority is directed to grant refund and also interest upon said amount, from the date of deposit till the date of grant of refund @ 12% per annum: CESTAT

++ ST - Comprehensive training given by appellant enables trainees to appear for examination conducted by IRDAI, hence would be entitled for exemption under Notfn 09/03-ST and falls squarely in definition as provided by Notfn 09/03-ST and 24/04-ST : CESTAT

++ Cus - 'Accordion Springs' imported by appellant are neither helical springs nor leaf springs and are a category of springs in themselves which are sold as 'Accordion springs' only, therefore, same falls under Customs heading 7320 90 90 'Other' : CESTAT

++ Cus - When CRCL test report favors the importer, there is no requirement for importer to produce evidence contrary to test report; Department ought not to have re-determined classification to levy Anti Dumping Duty; laminate flooring made of fibre board rightly classified under CTH 4411: CESTAT

++ CX - The credit claimed and availed by taxpayer is in accordance with law as applicable during year under dispute and therefore denial of same was uncalled for: CESTAT

++ CX - Appellant be given a fair chance by communicating quantum of interest payable and in event appellant discharges interest amount within 30 days, benefit of reduced penalty of 25% under Section 11AC(1)(c) may be extended: CESTAT

July 15, 2024

++ Cus - Alleged smuggling of 10Kg gold bars - Pathetic plight of an unfortunate Chinese woman who arrived by Air China Airlines on 12/12/19 from Beijing - State has an obligation to protect the liberty of foreigners - Petitioner is entitled to get Exit Permit: HC

++ Cus - Petitioner needs to be adequately compensated for the mental agony, trauma and sufferings undergone by her due to the conduct of the respondent - UOI to pay Rs.10 lakhs and recover the same from salary of official concerned: HC

++ Cus - Board Circulars are binding and department is precluded from challenging it's correctness - Conduct of respondent is wrongful and vindictive: HC

++ ST - SVLDRS, 2019 - No proof that SVLDRS-3 was communicated to petitioner - Since the money was enjoyed by petitioner for three years, they should pay a round figure of Rs.10 lakhs and thereafter respondent to issue SVLDRS-4: HC

++ GST - Since the petitioner was in jail custody in a NDPS case, he had no opportunity to either respond to the SCN or prefer an application for revocation of order of cancellation of registration - Appellate authority had mechanically rejected appeal - Petitioner to file returns for entire period and pay tax, interest, fine, late fees and penalty: HC

++ GST - Dashboard of portal redesigned - Confusion in accessing information - Petitioner permitted to challenge adjudication order by filing appeal along with application for condonation of delay: HC

++ GST - There may have been some confusion in identifying the notice/orders in the pre-redesigned dashboard of the portal - Order of attachment quashed - Petitioner to approach Appellate authority with COD application and who is to dispose appeal on merits after condoning delay: HC

++ Cus - As the product brochures, test reports and letter from supplier all confirm that iRETs which were imported were of less than 5 amperes, it is not necessary to examine other evidence adduced by appellant, there was a typographical error in Bills of Entry and invoices: CESTAT

++ Cus - Since EODC has been issued to appellant in respect of Advance Authorization, demand of duty and interest cannot sustain: CESTAT

++ CX - When credit on common input services is not availed, question of payment of 5% or 6% of value of exempted services will not arise, confirmation of demand is set aside along with interest and equal penalty: CESTAT

++ CX - The appellant is eligible for abatement of equivalized sales tax on the transaction value: CESTAT

++ ST - As appellant has already reversed the proportionate cenvat credit attributable to exempted services, they are not required to pay any amount equal to 5%/6% of value of exempted services: CESTAT

July 13, 2024

++ ST - Appellant has not been given any consideration for sale of fleet cards, the actual amount received from M/s. BPCL for sale of fleet cards cannot be subject to levy of service tax: CESTAT

++ Cus - When SCN is not fulfilling the ingredients provided under Section 11A(1) of Central Excise Act, 1944 (pari materia with sub-section (4) of Section 28 of Customs Act, 1962), then demand cannot be sustained on the ground of limitation: CESTAT

July 12, 2024

++ ST - Mere use of the expression 'fraud' and 'wilful mis-statement' etc. will not automatically attract the penal provision u/s 78 of FA, 1994: HC

++ ST - SCN issued alleging violation of rule 5(1) of the Valuation Rules, 2006 - Since the said rule has been held to be ultra vires section 67 of the FA, 1994, the SCN is without jurisdiction: HC

++ Cus - Petitioner is entitled for exemption from additional customs duty for aluminum waste and scrap under Serial No.220 of Notification No.12/2012-CE - Clear abuse of power by Commissioner(A): HC

++ ST - When there is no agreement/contract and also no flow of consideration from transporters / vehicle owners to appellant for having rendered service of BAS, allegation of provision of BAS lacks merit: CESTAT

++ CX - As correctness of calculation of duty payable is in dispute, matter needs to be remanded to adjudicating authority to quantify the correct duty payable by appellant: CESTAT

++ CX - Once the decision of Tribunal attained finality, appellant is entitled to claim refund of amount which was deposited by him under protest by debiting RG-23A: CESTAT

++ Cus - Since adjudication/appellate authority has not considered the provisions of Sections 18(4) of Customs Act, 1962, appeal is remanded to consider the plea of assessee regarding their entitlement of interest: CESTAT

++ Cus - When it is evident that appellant has paid duty under protest, department ought to have issued a speaking order immediately in regard to the issue whether appellant is eligible for benefit of Notfn 85/2004: CESTAT

July 11, 2024

++ GST - s.142(2)(a) - Collection of increased rents for the past period i.e. 01.09.2005 to 30.06.2017 shall also be treated as 'supply' and tax is payable thereon: AAR

++ GST - Registration cancelled as petitioner found non-existent at its principal place of business - However, petitioner had made repeated requests for change of its principal place, which request was rejected - Order set aside and matter remanded: HC

++ GST - Petitioner had applied for cancellation of registration and, therefore, stopped filing returns - Order rejecting such request set aside and matter remanded: HC

++ GST - A notice which does not specify the nature of allegations is incapable of eliciting a meaningful response - Order also merely refers to SCN and does not set out any intelligible reason to cancel registration - Both set aside: HC

++ GST - Decision to cancel a taxpayer's GST registration with retrospective effect must necessarily be premised on a rational basis and cannot be mechanical or whimsical: HC

++ GST - Petitioner could not participate in the proceedings on account of not being aware of the same - Interest of justice warrants reconsideration subject to putting petitioner on terms: HC

++ General Sales Tax - Review Petition can be resorted to only if there is error apparent on face of record & cannot be utilised as means of re-hearing or appeal: HC

++ Cus - Penalty cannot be enhanced in subsequent proceedings except in challenge that places importer on notice of intend to do so: CESTAT

++ CX - The duty paid, which was not payable, is to be refunded and no time-limit as prescribed under Section 11B of Central Excise Act would be applicable : CESTAT

July 10, 2024

++ Cus - Import of Crude Palm Oil - Rate of duty that will be applicable will be the one which was in force when the Ex-Bond Bills of Entry were presented: HC

++ ST - Refund - It is trite law that the orders passed by the higher forum is binding upon the subordinate authorities: HC

++ ST - Whether complexes/flats constructed for Surat Municipal Corporation under JNNURM amounts to 'personal use' and hence exempted from tax - Revenue appeal admitted: HC

++ CX - Department since had not specifically alleged that appellants did not comply with requirements or procedures laid down under Rule 5 ibid, rejection of refund claims provided under statute cannot be whittled down: CESTAT

++ ST - The issue as to whether services provided by appellant to its own members can be considered as service provided by one entity to another and taxable is mix of facts and law, matter to be reconsidered: CESTAT

++ ST - A composite works contract has to be taxed under works contract service and cannot be taxed under Erection, Commissioning or Installation Services: CESTAT

++ Cus - Even though appellant is not eligible for Notfn 32/97, duty demand cannot sustain as goods have already been exported: CESTAT

++ Cus - Personal penalty levied on co-noticees cannot be recovered from amount to be refunded to appellant: CESTAT

July 09, 2024

++ CX - In case of a package that does not attract provisions of SWAM Rules regarding mentioning retail price, even if retail price is mentioned, that itself will not attract s.4A(1) of the Excise Act: SC

++ GST - s.50 - Fundamental principle for charging interest is compensatory in nature and not in the nature of penalty: HC

++ GST - Introduction of proviso to s.50 was only to clarify with regard to leviability of interest on net tax liability and not on gross tax liability - Proviso has got nothing to do with the period for which interest is to be levied: HC

++ GST - Even assuming that sundry creditors were not paid for 180 days, at worst, the corresponding ITC would be reversible - Demanding tax on the said sum is untenable: HC

++ GST - Belated filing of GSTR-9/9C - Late fee demand - In view of notifications 7/2023 & 25/2023, one-time amnesty available: HC

++ GST - Availment of bogus ITC of 76.68 crores - No case of harassment - Respondent authority is justified in issuing provisional attachment order over movable/immovable properties: HC

++ GST - Filing of a hard copy of order appealed against is a purely procedural requirement: HC

++ ST - The withholding of eligibility of exemption and consequent demand of service tax from appellant is grossly illegal and cannot be sustained: CESTAT

++ ST - Service tax is leviable on the service charge, realized on Working Capital Term Loan by appellant: CESTAT

++ Cus - While the sales, which is not controverted, entitles appellant to refund, such refund is to be limited to that which was validly paid as duty : CESTAT

++ CX - Appellant is entitled to benefit of area based exemption under Notfn 50/2003- CE for the period 20.06.2009 to 21.03.2010, subsequent demand for period from 18.06.2009 to 21.03.2010 does not survive: CESTAT

++ CX - Since the demand being not sustainable against job-worker, recovery of cenvat credit on the ground of suppression in making differential duty payment from appellant, is unsustainable: CESTAT

July 08, 2024

++ CX - In absence of evidence that finished goods accounted were sold by appellant and that they received sale consideration, no grounds found for invoking extended period: CESTAT

++ ST - As sale and purchase of goods was involved without any element of commission and transaction was not on ‘Principal to Agent' basis, goods sold will not come within ambit of service even in post negative list period: CESTAT

++ ST - Appeals stand abated once the Resolution Plan has been approved by NCLT and CESTAT has become functus officio in matters relating to this appeal: CESTAT

July 06, 2024

++ ST - As appellant is engaged in construction of roads which is covered under Negative List and no service tax is payable by appellant, therefore, demand against appellant is not sustainable: CESTAT

++ Cus - When the documents established that of goods imported co-related with the invoices, the refund should not be denied on some minor variation in describing the goods: CESTAT

July 05, 2024

++ GST - s.17 - Breakwater wall constructed using Accropode can hardly be called 'plant or machinery' - ITC rightly denied: HC

++ GST - Merely because carried forward of CENVAT credit under erstwhile regime was approved by authority in September, 2017, refund of ITC cannot be denied by observing that no balance was available in electronic credit ledger in July/August, 2017: HC

++ GST - Part B of E-way bill - Stock transfer - Breakdown of truck transporting Mercedes Benz car - No intention to transfer goods without being accounted for - Order demanding tax and imposing penalty u/s 129 set aside: HC

+ + GST - Refund claim - COVID - 13/2022-CT excludes the period from 01.03.2020 to 28.02.2022 for computing limitation - As notification was not available when impugned orders were passed, benefit was not extended: HC

++ GST - Fusible interlining cloth - Fabric manufactured is partially coated - Same would not fall for classification under Ch. 59 but under Chapters 52 to 55 - Matter remanded: HC

++ Cus - Impending liquidation of a company, approved by duly constituted statutory authority, cannot be held to ranson through extraordinary recourse taken under Customs Act; appellate process should not be obviated by peremptory action by adjudicating authority: CESTAT

++ Cus - Partial disposal of issues in a notice, whether in relation to one noticee or all, jeopardizes integrity of proceedings warranting appellate or writ intervention: CESTAT

++ ST - Mere reference to invoices raised or payments made, without reference to specific provisions of a contract or working arrangement, will not be indicative of employer-employee relationship: CESTAT

++ ST - The allegation that ISD had not registered for distribution of CENVAT Credit to appellant is not sustainable, ISD has correctly distributed the credit to appellant and they had rightly availed CENVAT Credit thereof: CESTAT

++ CX - As is settled law, a word as provided in a statute or notification has to be read as it is rather than being interpreted in a different way: CESTAT

July 04, 2024

++ GST - GSTR-1 - B2B instead of B2C - By permitting Petitioner to rectify the error, there will be no loss whatsoever caused to the Opposite Parties - Directions issued: HC

++ GST - Appellate Authority has not adverted to any of the grounds which have been canvassed by the Registered taxpayer - Order set aside and matter remanded: HC

++ GST - SCN did not refer to interest or penalty but order imposes such liability - Since petitioner did not have an opportunity to respond, Order set aside and matter remanded subject to petitioner remitting 10% of disputed tax demand: HC

++ GST - s.16(4) - Recommendation of 53rd GST Council meeting - Extension of time limit to avail ITC - No coercive action against petitioner: HC

++ Cus - The exporter becomes entitled to MEIS benefits once it exported the notified goods to notified market and this benefit cannot be deprived except by cancellation of said scrips by DGFT itself after following due procedure: CESTAT

++ Cus - Import of Semiconductor fabrication systems - Value declared by importer is same as proforma invoice value declared by supplier; no mis-declaration or suppression is made out; confiscation of goods unwarranted: CESTAT

++ CX - The demand raised and confirmed denying Cenvat credit availed on CVD paid on imported Steam Coal cannot sustain: CESTAT

July 03, 2024

++ Cus - Export of non-basmati rice - Notification 20/2023 insofar as it denies the benefit of the transitional arrangement as contained in para-1.05 of the FTP 2023, is bad in law: HC

++ Cus - Refund of SAD - 102/2007-Cus - Areca Nut and Supari are one and the same - Objections with regard to name, nature and status of importer or buyers or the end use of goods purchased by them etc. are extraneous: HC

++ CX - Interest on Refund - Since wrong order annexed by petitioner in paper book, Bench is unable to proceed further - Petition is dismissed with liberty to file a fresh one: HC

++ GST - No E-way bill - When petitioner imports machinery and after Customs clearance, transports same to his own factory, it cannot be said that such a transportation would fall within the definition of term 'supply' - Penalty imposable under second limb of s.129(1)(a): HC

++ GST - Fix responsibility on officers who allowed BG to lapse - Petitioner not justified in not renewing BG - Cost of Rs.15 lacs imposed, to be paid to PM Cares Fund: HC

++ GST - Since the parties agree that petition can be disposed of on the basis of records available before Appellate Authority, petitioner is directed to enclose all documents filed before Appellate Authority in a compilation, in form of a paper book: HC

++ ST - Whether any service is used for personal consumption or not is certainly question of fact and being question of fact, no substantial question of law arises: HC

++ ST - If what has been paid as tax is without authority of law, Revenue should refund the same - Denial of credit would result in the whole exercise being tax neutral: HC

++ ST - Even if the petitioner may have a case on merits, it is best left to be decided by the Appellate Authority under the hierarchy prescribed under the FA, 1994: HC

++ GST - Petitioner challenges jurisdiction of assessing officer - Petitioner is entitled to file an appeal u/s 107 by availing an alternate efficacious remedy: HC

++ GST - Existence of an alternative remedy is a material consideration but not a bar to the exercise of jurisdiction: HC

++ GST -  It is open to a trader to take goods by whichever route he opts, unless the law otherwise requires, destination point being intact: HC

++ GST - Conclusion that taxable person is providing a service to supplier while taking the benefit of a discount by facilitating an increase in the volume of sales of such supplier is ex facie erroneous and contrary to the fundamental tenets of GST law: HC

++ GST - Order expressly records that personal hearing notice was returned with endorsement 'no such person at address' - Since petitioner has shifted to a new premises, it is just and necessary to provide an opportunity to contest demand: HC

July 02, 2024

++ Cus - Uploading assessment order on portal is not sufficient compliance of intimation: HC

++ Cus - If any refund arises out of any order passed by the Commissioner(A)/Tribunal, unless a stay order is obtained, refund must be granted after three months from the date of the order: HC

++ ST - Petitioner was subjected to pay tax for the services availed for generation of power - Since Notification 15/2017-ST has been struck down, respondent to refund tax already paid: HC

++ ST - Non-imposition of Penalty - Once it is a discretion to be exercised, there can be no substantial questions of law arising thereof: HC

++ GST - Transitional Credit - Recording invoices in the books of account, extension of time allowed u/s 140(5) proviso - However, it does not provide date by which such application is to be filed: HC

++GST - Exports - Refund of IGST - Broken rings and chains supplied for making jewellery - Value of gold sold by jeweller would be shown inclusive of what is received - Respondent has excluded such value while working out refund - Matter remanded: HC

++ GST - GSTAT was not constituted when petition was filed - Since constituted now, petitioner directed to exhaust alternate remedy by filing appeal before it: HC

July 01, 2024

++ GST - Mandating that refund applications have to be filed electronically is contrary to rule 97A which permits manual filing of applications - Pay 10,000/- as costs: HC

++ GST - No  GST DRC-04 was issued - Payment of Rs.30 lakhs could not have been said to be voluntary as it was done during search, which search completed after two hours of payment - Authorities to return amount: HC

++ GST - Entire liability towards tax, interest and penalty was appropriated from petitioner's bank account - Interest of justice warrants that petitioner be provided an opportunity to contest tax demand on merits: HC

++ GST - Tax proposal was confirmed without the petitioner being heard - Order set aside and matter remanded, but upon the petitioner remitting 15% of tax demand: HC

++ GST - In absence of evidence of non-payment for more than 180 days, it could not have been concluded that petitioner was not entitled to avail ITC - Matter remanded: HC

++ GST - ITC - Purchase of goods vehicle, whether for furtherance of business - Petitioner to remit 10% disputed tax - Matter remanded: HC

++ GST - Petitioner could not participate in the proceedings since being unaware of the same - Matter remanded subject to petitioner remitting 10% of disputed tax demand: HC

++ GST - Petitioner's reply was construed as vague and not trustworthy because they failed to submit documents for reconciliation - Re-consideration is warranted in interest of justice subject to deposit of 10% of disputed tax: HC

++ ST - The case needs to be re-heard by Original Adjudicating Authority giving opportunity to appellant to defend their case effectively and explain the nature of income in respect of which Department is alleging levy of Service Tax: CESTAT

++ CX - The services on which credit was availed are integral to the business of manufacture carried out by appellants, impugned order cannot be sustained and is set aside: CESTAT