Tax
Mere Wrong Availment Of Exemption Notification Does Not Mean That Availment Was Done To Evade Payment Of Central Excise Duty: CESTAT
The New Delhi Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has stated that mere wrong availment of exemption notification does not mean that availment was done to evade payment of central excise duty. The Bench of Dilip Gupta (President) and P. V. Subba Rao (Technical) has observed that, “Mere wrong availment of an Exemption Notification would not lead to a conclusion that it was with an intent to evade payment of central excise duty unless the department is...
S.197 IT Act | AO Must Form Prima Facie Opinion Regarding Taxability In India Before Rejecting Assessee's Application For Nil TDS: Delhi HC
The Delhi High Court has made it clear that before rejecting an assessee's application under Section 197 of the Income Tax Act 1961 for nil TDS or deduction of tax at a lower rate, the assessing officer must form a prima facie opinion regarding the assessee's taxability in India.Section 197(1) of the Act enables an assessee to make an application for a certificate requiring the deduction of tax at a lower rate or no deduction at all if the Assessing Officer is satisfied that the total income of...
Delhi HC Grants Relief To Foreigner Whose Rolex Watch Was Seized By Customs, Says Waiver Of Show Cause & Hearing In 'Standard Form' Not Lawful
The Delhi High Court has reiterated that authorities making a traveller waive show cause notice before confiscation of goods, etc. under Section 124 of the Customs Act 1962, on a mere proforma, is not lawful.A division bench of Justices Prathiba M. Singh and Dharmesh Sharma thus granted relief to a permanent resident of Hong Kong, whose Rolex wristwatch valued at ₹30,29,400/- was confiscated by the Customs Department at the airport.It observed, “This is another case where the Department is...
Designated Committee Under Sabka Vishwas Scheme May Reject Application For Compounding Tax Over Bogus Documents: Telangana High Court
A division bench of the Andhra Pradesh High Court has dismissed a writ petition filed by M/s Diwakar Road Lines challenging the rejection of an application to compound all previous service tax by way of a one-time settlement. The bench held that even though the statute does not prescribe for the rejection of any application, the committee may reject an application when the documents relied upon are ingenuine. The Division Bench comprising of Justice R. Raghunandan Rao and Justice...
Central Govt Employee Cannot Change Destination Midway While Claiming Leave Travel Concession: Delhi High Court
The Delhi High Court has made it clear that in terms of the Central Civil Services (Leave Travel Concession) Rules, 1988 an employee cannot change travel destination midway through the journey and if due to some unavoidable circumstance it has been changed, the same has to be a destination which is en route.In the case at hand, LTC was originally sought for travel to Trivandrum, which was subsequently changed to Goa, via Mumbai. However, the petitioner decided midway to change his destination to...
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...
ITAT Cannot Overstep Its Authority By Deciding On Merits When It Had Already Concluded Appeal Was Not Maintainable: Bombay High Court
The Bombay High Court stated that ITAT cannot overstep its authority by deciding on merits when it has already concluded an appeal was not maintainable. The Division Bench of Justices M.S. Sonak and Jitendra Jain observed that “Once the ITAT concluded that the Appeal before it against the impugned communication/order was not “maintainable”, there was no question of the ITAT evaluating the impugned communication/order on its merits or making any observations or recording any findings...
AO Becomes 'Functus Officio' After Closure Of Assessment, Must Put Relevant Incriminating Material To Assessee To Re-Confer Jurisdiction: Delhi HC
The Delhi High Court has made it clear that after the closure of assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer becomes 'functus officio' and to re-confer jurisdiction upon the AO to initiate re-assessment proceedings, relevant incriminating material ought to be put to the assessee.A division bench of Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela made the observation while dealing with a writ petition filed by Vivo Mobiles, assailing the reassessment proceedings initiated...
Consolidated SCN Involving Multiple Assessment Years Can Be Issued Only When Common Period Of Adjudication Exists: Kerala High Court
The Kerala High Court stated that consolidated show cause notice involving multiple assessment years can be issued when common period of adjudication exists. “Issuing a consolidated show cause notice covering various financial/assessment years would cause prejudice to an assessee who would not get the full period envisaged for adjudication under the Statute, if that period is circumscribed by the limitation period prescribed in relation to an earlier financial/assessment year” stated...
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...
Benefit Of Input Tax Credit Can't Be Reduced Without Statutory Sanction : Supreme Court
The Supreme Court recently held that Rule 21(8) of the Punjab Value Added Tax Rules, 2005, which was notified on January 25, 2014, could not be applied to transactions before April 1, 2014, as the enabling amendment to Section 13 of the parent statute, the Punjab Value Added Tax Act, 2005, was effective from that date.This means businesses that bought goods at a higher tax rate before this date are not subject to the limitation imposed by Rule 21(8) when claiming ITC, even if the tax rate was...
Delay Of Two Days In Issuing GST Notice Can't Be Condoned: Andhra Pradesh High Court
The Andhra Pradesh High Court stated that delay of two days in issuing the GST notice cannot be condoned. The Division Bench of Justices R. Raghunandan Rao and Harinath N. observed that “the time permit set out under 73(2) of the Act is mandatory and any violation of that time period cannot be condoned, and would render the show cause notice otiose.” In this case, the assessee/petitioner received a show cause notice, dated 30.11.2024, in relation to the assessment year 2020-2021...