Madras High Court
S.17 PMLA | Can't Direct ED To Serve 'Reasons To Believe' Before Conducting Search, May Lead To Concealment Of Evidence: Madras High Court
The Madras High Court has held that it cannot issue an omnibus direction mandating the Enforcement Directorate to serve 'reason to believe' the commission of money laundering offence before conducting a search in terms of Section 17 PMLA, as the same may alert the suspect to conceal evidence."Section 17 is a preliminary stage where based on some information in possession the ED search is conducted and if no prima facie case is made out, automatically all action is dropped, but if any...
"Further Incarceration Would Violate Rights Under Article 21": Madras HC Grants Bail To Former DMK Functionary Jaffer Sadiq Arrested By ED
The Madras High Court has granted bail to former DMK functionary Jaffer Sadiq and his brother Mohammed Saleem who were arrested by the Enforcement Directorate in connection with a PMLA case. Considering that the trial was not likely to be completed in the near future, Justice Sunder Mohan opined that further incarceration would violate the rights under Article 21 of the Constitution. Thus, the court was inclined to grant bail on certain conditions to ensure that the duo would be...
Madras High Court Reserves Orders On Pleas Challenging ED Search At TASMAC Headquarters, Verdict Likely On April 23
The Madras High Court has reserved orders on pleas filed by the State Government and the Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation challenging the recent searches conducted by the Enforcement Directorate on the TASMAC headquarters on March 6 and March 8. The bench of Justice SM Subramaniam and Justice K Rajasekar reserved the orders today after hearing Senior Advocate Vikas Singh for TASMAC. In the previous hearing itself the court had said that it would reserve the orders but gave a special...
Goods Exempted From Customs Duty, May Still Be Subject To Levy Of Additional Duty Under Respective Enactments: Madras High Court
The Madras High Court stated that goods imported exempted from basic customs duty, may still be subject to levy of additional duty under respective enactments. “The goods imported, even though exempted from basic customs duty, may still be subject to levy of additional duty under the respective enactments and they would be so subject unless and until they are specifically exempted by the competent authority in exercise of the powers vested under those respective enactments from such...
CENVAT Credit Can't Be Denied Merely On Non-Submission Of User Test Certificate: Madras High Court
The Madras High Court stated that user test certificate is not mandatory before adjudicating show cause notice. The Division Bench of Justices R. Suresh Kumar and G. Arul Murugan opined that show cause notices cannot be adjudicated merely on the ground that the User Test Certificate has not been produced by the assessee. In this case, the respondent/assessee is a manufacturer of sugar and molasses. The assessee has availed CENVAT Credit for the capital goods used in establishing a ...
Works Contract For Track Doubling & Infrastructure Under RVNL Is Liable To 12% GST: Madras High Court
The Madras High Court stated that the works contract for track doubling and infrastructure under RVNL is liable to 12% GST. Justice Mohammed Shaffiq stated that “it may be relevant to keep in mind that while exemption notifications must be strictly construed, it certainly would not mean that the scope of the exemption notification can be curtailed by importing conditions or giving an artificially restrictive meaning to the words in an exemption notification.” In this case, the...
Sections 43B & 40A Income Tax Act | Which Provision Prevails When Both Commence With Non-Obstante Clause? Madras High Court Clarifies
The Madras High Court while referring sections 43B and 40A Income Tax Act explained which provision prevails when both commence with a non-obstante clause. The Division Bench of Justices Dr. Anita Sumanth and G. Arul Murugan stated that “the Rule that a general provision should yield to specific provision springs from the common understanding that when two directions are given one encompassing a large number of matters in general and another to only some, the latter directions should...
Party Nominating Arbitrator In Response To Notice U/S 21 Of Arbitration Act Is Prohibited From Raising Plea Of Limitation In Petition U/S 11: Madras HC
The Madras High Court bench of Justice Abdul Quddhose has held that once a party nominates an arbitrator in response to a notice issued under Section 21 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (Arbitration Act), it cannot later argue in a petition under Section 11 of the Act that the claim for which the notice was issued is time-barred. Brief Facts: The petition has been filed under section 11 of the Arbitration Act seeking the appointment of an Arbitrator. A dispute has ...
Notification Cannot Be Given Retrospective Effect To Deny Refund On Unutilised ITC Claimed Within Limitation Period: Madras HC Allows Gillette's Plea
Finding that the refund claim was filed within two years from the “relevant date” as defined in Explanation 2(a) to Section 54(14) of CGST Act , the Madras High Court recently clarified that a refund claim cannot be denied on the basis of retrospective operation of the Proviso to Rule 90(3) pf the CGST Rules.The High Court clarified this upon finding that the refund claims filed in the portal on Sep 21, 2018, Oct 09, 2018 and Oct 10, 2018, were within two years from the date of exports made...
'Why Didn't ED Wait For Outcome Of Complaint?' : Madras High Court Stays ED Attachment Of Director Shankar's Property Over Copyright Dispute
The Madras High Court on Tuesday stayed an order of the Enforcement Directorate provisionally attaching property worth Rs. 10 crore of Tamil filmmaker S Shankar in a copyright infringement case in connection with the 2010 movie 'Enthiran'. The bench of Justice MS Ramesh and Justice N Senthilkumar stayed the provisional attachment order on a plea moved by the Director. The ED had attached the property on February 17 following a complaint by Arur Tamilnadan claiming that Shankar had...
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 ...
Appeal Can't Be Dismissed Due To Procedural Delay When Assessee Has Complied With Statutory Requirements Including Pre-Deposit: Madras HC
The Madras High Court stated that appeal can't be dismissed due to procedural delay, when assessee has complied statutory requirements including pre-deposit. “The appeal should not be dismissed merely due to a procedural delay, especially when the petitioner has made an effort to comply with the statutory requirements, including the pre-deposit of 10% of the tax liability and additional payments towards the disputed tax amount” stated the bench of Justice Vivek Kumar Singh. In ...