Commercial Tax | Allahabad High Court Upholds Condonation Of 1365 Days Delay On Sufficient Cause

The Allahabad High Court has upheld condonation of delay of 1365 days by the Commercial Tax Tribunal in filing of appeal as it was sufficiently explained by the authorities.Revisionist-assesee approached the High Court against order of the Commercial Tax Tribunal condoning the delay of 1365 days on part of the Department in filing the appeal. Reliance was placed on the decision of the Allahabad High Court in M/s Anil Enterprises v. Commissioner of Commercial Tax, U.P. Lucknow to argue that...

UPGST | Burden To Prove Intention To Evade Tax Lies Solely On Department: Allahabad High Court

On Wednesday, the Allahabad High Court held that the burden to prove intention to evade tax lies solely on the Department. The Court held penalties in tax laws should not be imposed solely on insignificant technical errors which do not have any financial consequences.The Court held that penalties should only be imposed where there is concrete evidence to show that an assesee is deliberately trying to defraud the system and not in cases of unintentional mistakes. While quashing a penalty order...

UPGST | Opportunity Of Hearing Mandatory Under S75(4) Before Imposing Tax/Penalty: Allahabad High Court

The Lucknow Bench of the Allahabad High Court held that before passing of any adverse order, such as imposing tax or penalty, opportunity of hearing is mandatory under Section 75(4) of the Uttar Pradesh Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017.Section 75(4) of the UPGST Act provides that an opportunity of hearing must be granted if requested in writing or where any adverse action is contemplated against such person. Petitioner was issued show cause notices asking it to show cause as to why tax and...

Section 5 Of Limitation Act Does Not Apply To Section 107 Of CGST Act: Allahabad High Court

The Allahabad High Court has held that Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 does not apply to appeals filed under Section 107 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017.“The Central Goods and Services Act is a special statute and a self-contained code by itself. Section 107 of the Act has an inbuilt mechanism and has impliedly excluded the application of the Limitation Act. It is trite law that Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 will apply only if it is extended to the special statute....

Assessee Failed To Cure Defects As Documents Were In The Custody Of Central GST Authority: Madras High Court Quashes Assessment Order

The Madras High Court has quashed the assessment order and held that the defect was not cured due to the availability of records in the custody of the central GST authority.The bench of Justice Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy has observed that a composite order of assessment was issued with regard to four defects, and the documents on record disclose that the non-availability of records, on account of such documents being in the custody of the Central GST authority, undoubtedly impacted the...

IGST Refund Claim May Be Made Before Expiry Of 2 Years From Date Of Export Of Goods: Madras High Court

The Madras High Court has held that an IGST refund claim may be made before the expiry of two years from the relevant date. The relevant date is required to be computed from the date of export of the goods concerned by any mode.The bench of Justice Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy has observed that since the refund claim pertains to exports made between July 2017 and November 2017 and the refund application was filed on January 9, 2019, it is clear that the refund application was made within two years...

Bombay High Court Directs Dept. To Accept Declaration Under VsV Act

The Bombay High Court at Goa has directed the department to accept the declaration under the Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020 (VsV Act).The bench of Justice M. S. Sonak and Justice Valmiki Sa Menezes has observed that the delay alleged on the part of the Petitioner is hardly 11 days. The alleged deficit payment, if any, is of hardly 2,21,862. However, even if it is assumed that there was some marginal delay, this delay is attributable to the technical glitches and also the mistakes of the Respondents...

AO Has No Jurisdiction To Assess Or Reassess Income Which Was Subject Matter Of Appeal: Bombay High Court

The Bombay High Court has held that the AO has no jurisdiction to assess or reassess any income, which was the subject matter of an appeal.The bench of Justice K.R. Shriram and Justice Neela Gokhale has observed that since the grant of benefit under Section 11 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, was the subject matter of appeal and has been held in favour of the assessee, the matter cannot be reopened.The petitioner/assessee is a society registered under the Societies Registration Act, of 1960, and is...

Tax Return Filed Without Regular Books Of Account Not Invalid, Burden To Call For Curing Of Defects On Assessing Officer: Supreme Court

While deciding the question as to whether reopening of a concluded assessment under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act (“Act”) was legally sustainable or not, the Supreme Court recently held that for the purposes of tax assessment, an assessee's obligation is limited to making a "full and true" disclosure of all "material" or primary facts, and thereafter, the burden shifts on the assessing officer. If a return is defective, it is upto the officer that he intimate the assessee in order that...

Payment To Third Party Instead Of Selling Dealer, ITC Not Allowable: Calcutta High Court

The Calcutta High Court has held that the writ petitioner is not entitled to the benefit of input tax credit as he has not paid the amount to the selling dealer but to a third party.The bench of Chief Justice T.S. Sivagnanam and Justice Supratim Bhattacharya has observed that the writ petitioner is precluded from adding words to a statute to state that he will be entitled to the benefit of the input tax credit, though he has not paid the amount to the selling dealer to a third party based on...

Patna High Court Imposes Fine Of Rs. 5,000 On GST Officer For 'Forcible And Illegal Recovery' Amid Non-Functional GST Tribunal

In a recent ruling, the Patna High Court slapped a fine of Rs 5,000 on a Goods and Services Tax ( GST ) officer for forcible and illegal recovery of the full tax amount from a man waiting to avail the statutory remedy of appeal before GST tribunal which has not been made functional in Bihar. The court has directed the department to reimburse the entire collected tax within 2 weeks. The ruling was issued by a division bench led by Chief Justice K Vinod Chandran and Justice Rajiv Roy, granting...

CESTAT Quashes Service Tax Demand Against HSBC Electronic Data Processing India On Back Office Support Services Exported To Its Group Entity

The Hyderabad Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has quashed the service tax demand against HSBC Electronic Data Processing India on back office support services exported to its group entity.The bench of Anil Choudhary (Judicial Member) and A.K. Jyotishi (Technical Member) has observed that there is a connection between the visits of foreign customers and the back-office support services provided by the appellant. In terms of the sub-contracting arrangement,...