Tax
GST | Stereo System In E-Rickshaw An Input, Calcutta High Court Grants Refund To Manufacturer
The Calcutta High Court, in a matter concerning admissibility of Input Tax Credit (ITC) for purchase of 'stereo system' to be used in E-rickshaw, has granted Refund claim of Unutilized Input Tax Credit under inverted duty structure amounting to approximately ₹8 lakhs. The Calcutta High Court was called-upon to decide whether "Stereo System" was an input/ raw material in manufacturing of E-rickshaw covered by HSN-87031090. Also, whether ITC involved in purchase of "stereo system" would...
Customs Officials Acting In Official Capacity Not Liable To Cross-Examination As Matter Of Right: Delhi High Court
The Delhi High Court has held that Customs officials discharging their duties in an official capacity are not liable to be cross-examined as a matter of right during adjudication proceedings under the Customs Act.A Division Bench of Justices Prathiba M. Singh and Shail Jain made the observation while partially allowing a writ petition challenging denial of Petitioner's request to cross-examine certain persons in a customs duty evasion case.As per the show cause notice, Petitioner was involved in...
Income Tax Act | Multiple Presentations Of Proposal For Reopening U/S 148 After Rejection Not Permissible: Uttarakhand High Court
The Uttarakhand High Court held that once a proposal for reopening an assessment under Section 148 is rejected by the competent authority, repeated representations of the same proposal are impermissible and without jurisdiction. Chief Justice G. Narendar and Justice Subhash Upadhyay examined whether the multiple presentations / repeated re-presentation of the proposal for initiation of proceedings under Section 148 to the Competent Authority under Section 151, is permissible under the...
Madras High Court Annual Tax Digest 2025
Direct TaxFAOs And JAOs Have Concurrent Jurisdiction For Assessment, Re-assessment Or Re-Computation U/S 147 Income Tax Act: Madras High CourtCase Title: Mark Studio India Private Limited v. Income Tax Officer and OthersCase No: W.P.Nos.25223 & 25227 of 2024The Madras High Court recently clarified that both the Faceless Assessment Officer and Jurisdictional Assessment Officer have concurrent jurisdiction as far as assessment, re-assessment or re-computation under Section 147 of the Income...
GST Refund Claim Cannot Be Rejected Unless Mandatory Procedure Under Rule 92(3) CGST Rules Is Followed: Jharkhand High Court
The High Court of Jharkhand has set aside GST refund rejection orders passed against Carbon Resources Private Limited, holding that the tax department violated mandatory procedure and principles of natural justice while rejecting the refund claim. A Division Bench comprising Chief Justice Tarlok Singh Chauhan and Justice Rajesh Shankar was hearing two writ petitions challenging a refund rejection order and a subsequent rectification order passed by the Assistant Commissioner, Central...
Once GST Appeal Is Filed On Portal, No Mandatory Requirement To File Hard Copy Or Certified Copy Of Order: J&K&L High Court
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that once a GST appeal is filed electronically within the statutory period along with the uploaded order, there is no requirement to file a hard copy or certified copy of the order. Justices Sindhu Sharma and Shahzad Azeem stated that the appeal was filed online within statutory period along with the copy of order and therefore, there was no requirement of filing the hard copy of the same. Therefore, its rejection on the ground of not...
Delhi High Court Allows Use Of Transitional CENVAT Credit For Mandatory Pre-Deposit Before CESTAT
The Delhi High Court, in a 'rare' scenario where an appeal was sought to be admitted before the CESTAT on the strength of pre-deposit made using through DRC-03, has clarified that pre-deposit was partial component of the demand just as tax, interest and penalty. In a recent judgment dated December 22, 2025, the Delhi High Court dealt with whether CENVAT credit transitioned into the GST regime as on July 01, 2017 could be utilised for the purpose of making pre-deposit or not. A ...
ITAT Flags Mismatch Between Stock & Sales Of Jewellery Firm During Demonetisation Period, Orders Fresh Examination
The Lucknow Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has set aside an appellate order deleting a ₹2.75 crore addition made on account of cash deposits during the demonetisation period and has remanded the matter back to the Assessing Officer for a fresh assessment. A Bench comprising Vice President Kul Bharat and Accountant Member Anadee Nath Mishra was hearing the Revenue's appeal against an order passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre, which had earlier deleted the...
Delhi High Court Grants Bail To Accountant Accused Of Running Fake Firms, Passing Fraudulent ITC On ₹5 Lakh Bond
The Delhi High Court on Friday, December 26 2025 has granted bail to an Accountant allegedly involved in running fictitious firms and passing on fraudulent Input Tax Credit (ITC) upon furnishing a bond of Rs. 5,00,000. A Vacation Bench of Justice Vikas Mahajan found this a fit case for regular bail noting 'no previous involvements' with co-accused already released on bail in 2024 in Bail Application No. 1968/2024. Further, from the status report the Delhi High Court inferred that the...
Customs Notifications Cannot Override FTP & HBP Benefits Once DGFT Grants Approval: CESTAT Chennai Grants Relief To Hyundai Motor
The Chennai Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) held that once benefits under the Foreign Trade Policy (FTP) and Handbook of Procedures (HBP) are granted by the Directorate General of Foreign Trade (DGFT), the same cannot be nullified by Customs through Notifications or Circulars issued under the Customs Act, 1962. Ajayan T.V (Judicial Member) and Ajit Kumar (Technical Member) stated that if the Central Government in its wisdom introduces a beneficial...
Penalty U/S 45A KGST Act Cannot Be Initiated Beyond 'Reasonable Time' Despite No Prescribed Limitation Period: Kerala High Court
The Kerala High Court held that even though Section 45A of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963 (KGST Act) does not prescribe any limitation period, penalty proceedings must be initiated within a reasonable time. Justices A. Muhamed Mustaque and Harisankar V. Menon stated that since the notice was issued with reference to the assessment year 2011-12, the period of five years had come to an end on 31.03.2017. The notice was issued admittedly only on 20.12.2018. The above notice is...
No Service Tax Payable On Laying Of Cables Under Or Alongside Roads: CESTAT Kolkata
The Kolkata Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) held that consideration received for laying of underground telecom/optical fibre cables under or alongside roads is not liable to service tax. Ashok Jindal (Judicial Member) and K. Anpazhakan (Technical Member) opined that the entire demand confirmed in the impugned order under these specific categories is not liable to Service Tax, as all the amounts received by the assessee pertain to laying of cables...