GST&VAT&CST
Delhi High Court Allows Indigo Airlines' Plea, Holds Levy Of Additional IGST On Repaired & Re-Imported Aircraft Parts To Be Unconstitutional
In big relief to Indigo airlines, the Delhi High Court has held that an additional levy of Integrated Goods and Services Tax (IGST) and cess under Section 3(7) of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 on re-import of aircraft parts that were repaired abroad, is unconstitutional.A division bench of Justice Yashwant Varma and Ravinder Dudeja observed that “additional duty even after the transaction has been subjected to the imposition of a tax treating it to be a supply of service would be clearly...
Rule 36(4) Of CGST Rules Is Constitutionally Valid, Does Not Derive Power From Section 43A: Gauhati High Court
The Gauhati High Court has upheld the constitutional validity of Rule 36(4) of the Central Goods and Services Tax/Assam Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017. The provision stipulates documentary requirements and conditions for a registered person claiming input tax credit (ITC).A division bench of Chief Justice Vijay Bishnoi and Justice N. Unni Krishnan Nair observed that the provision was enacted based on powers derived from Section 16 of the CGST Act and the general rule-making powers under...
[CGST ACT] Dept Can't Seize Goods If Quantity Or Weight Of Goods Is Found Correct On Physical Verification: Calcutta High Court
The Calcutta High Court stated that GST department cannot seize the goods if the quantity or weight of the goods is found correct on physical verification. The Division Bench of Chief Justice T.S Sivagnanam and Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharyya noted that the quantity or the weight of the goods, which were carried in the vehicle, has been found to be correct by the department on physical verification and there is no discrepancy. The bench further stated that “the inspecting authority...
Anticipatory Bail Application Maintainable Against Arrest Under GST Act : Supreme Court Overrules Its Previous Judgments
The Supreme Court has overruled its previous decisions which held that anticipatory bail applications were not maintainable with respect to offences under the Goods and Services Tax Act.A three-judge bench comprising Chief Justice of India Sanjiv Khanna, Justice MM Sundresh and Justice Bela Trivedi overruled the two-judge bench judgments in State of Gujarat v. Choodamani Parmeshwaran Iyer and Another and Bharat Bhushan v. Director General of GST Intelligence, Nagpur Zonal Unit Through Its...
Supply Of Holographic Stickers By Prohibition & Excise Dept For Affixing On Alcohol Bottles Is Supply Of “Goods”, Not Taxable: Madras High Court
The Madras High Court has recently observed that the supply of holographic stickers or excise labels by the Prohibition and Excise Department which is to be affixed on manufactured and bottles alcoholic liquor is a supply of “goods” simplicitor and not a supply of “service”. The court thus ruled that such supply of holographic stickers would not be taxable under the GST enactments. Justice C Saravanan noted that the holographic sticker was a label and therefore a good within the ...
Some Merit In Allegations That GST Officials Coerce Assesses To Pay Tax With Threat Of Arrest; It's Impermissible: Supreme Court
The Supreme Court on Thursday (February 27) observed that there was some merit in the allegation that tax officials coerce assesses to pay the Goods and Services Tax with the threat of arrest. This observation was made by the Court on the basis of data.The Court said that if any person is feeling coerced to pay GST, they can approach the writ court for refund of the tax paid by them under coercion. The Court also said that the officers who indulge in such coercion must be dealt with...
GST Act | Can Time Limit To Adjudicate Show Cause Notice Be Extended By Notification Under S.168A? Supreme Court To Consider
The Supreme Court is to decide whether the time limit for adjudicating show cause notice and passing an order can be extended by the issuance of notifications under Section 168-A of the GST Act. This provision empowers the Government to issue notification for extending the time limit prescribed under the Act which cannot be complied with due to force majeure.“The issue that falls for the consideration of this Court is whether the time limit for adjudication of show cause notice and passing order...
Article 226 Can't Be Invoked Against An SCN Issued U/S 74 Of CGST Act At Preliminary Stage: Kerala High Court
The Kerala High Court stated that Article 226 cannot be invoked against a show cause notice issued under Section 74 of the CGST Act at preliminary stage. “Article 226 of the Constitution of India is not meant to be used to break the resistance of the Revenue in this fashion. In exercise of such jurisdiction, the High Court is required to refrain from issuing directions to the authorities under the taxation statute to decide issues in stages or on a preliminary basis,” stated the...
Cash Seized From Assessee Cannot Be Retained By GST Dept Or IT Dept Prior To Finalisation Of Proceedings: Kerala High Court
The Kerala High Court stated that illegal cash seizure by GST Department and handing over to Income Tax Department is illegal under Section 132A of the Income Tax Act. The Division Bench of Justices A.K. Jyasankaran Nambiar and Easwaran S. held that “Cash amount seized from the premises of the assessee cannot be retained either by the GST Department of the State or the Income Tax Department prior to a finalisation of respective proceedings initiated by them,” In this case, the...