Building And Fabricating Tipper Body If Chassis Is Owned, Supplied By The Customer Attracts 18% GST: Punjab AAR

The Punjab Authority of Advance Ruling (AAR) has held that the building and fabricating of a tipper body if the chassis is owned and supplied by the customer attract 18% GST.The two-member bench of Varinder Kaur and Viraj Shayamkarn Tidke has observed that 28% GST is payable on the activity of building and fabricating a Tipper Body and mounting the same by the applicant on the chassis owned by the applicant and using its own inputs and capital goods.The applicant is engaged in Tipper Body...

Reversal of ITC At Midnight During Search And Seizure Operation Can't Be Treated As Voluntary Payment: Gujarat High Court Directs Refund

The Gujarat High Court has held that the reversal of input tax credit (ITC) at midnight during search and seizure operations can't be treated as a voluntary payment.The division bench of Justice Sonia Gokani and Justice Sandeep S. Bhatt has directed the department to reverse the ITC to the tune of Rs. 37,68,300 along with 6% interest.The petitioner is in the business of trading industrial chemicals such as soda ash, silica bicarbonates, etc. On February 11, 2022, a search and seizure operation...

ITAT Upholds Income Tax Addition On Amount Received For Arbitration Settlement

The Delhi Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has upheld the income tax addition on the amount received for arbitration settlement from Indian Oil Infrastructure & Energy Services.The two-member bench of Kul Bharat (Judicial Member) and Narendra Kumar Billaiya (Accountant Member) has observed that the assessee was engaged in the project only through its PE in India. In view of the complete involvement of the PE, the settlement amount arising out of the MOU consequent upon...

NFAC Bound By The Decision Of Jurisdictional High Court: ITAT

The Bangalore Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has held that the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) was bound by the binding decision of the jurisdictional high court, where the AO was situated.The two-member bench of N.V. Vasudevan (Vice President) and Laxmi Prasad Sahu (Accountant Member) has observed that an appeal against the decision of the Agra ITAT would be before the Allahabad High Court. Therefore, the decision rendered by the Allahabad High Court is binding not...

Personal Hearing To Be Granted In All Matters Prior To Finalisation Of Assessment: Madras High Court

The Madras High Court has held that personal hearings shall be granted in all matters prior to the finalization of assessments, except where the stand of the assessee is intended to be accepted by the department.The single bench of Justice Anitha Sumanth has observed that the officer has grossly erred in proceeding to finalize the assessment in violation of the principles of natural justice.The petitioner/assessee company is in the business of civil construction and is registered under the...

Who Is The Proper Authority To Decide IGST Refund? Bombay High Court Directs The Dept. To Decide

The Bombay High Court has directed the department to decide who has the proper authority to decide on an IGST refund.The division bench of Justice Nitin Jamdar and Justice Abhay Ahuja has noted that the customs authorities claimed that the GST authority is the proper officer for processing refund claims, whereas the GST authorities claim that it is the customs officer.The court directed both authorities to discuss amongst themselves and file a joint note, failing which the officers would be...

AO Issued Income Tax Assessment Notice To Non-Existent Company: Calcutta High Court Imposes Cost

The Calcutta High Court has imposed a fine of Rs. 20,000 on the assessing officer for issuing the income tax assessment notice to the non-existent company."It also appears from the past record that in respect of another assessee, this court has imposed the personal cost of Rs. 10,000 upon the very same Assessing Officer, Bitan Roy, by order dated August 2, 2023," the bench of Justice Md. Nizamuddin observed.The petitioner has challenged the notice under Section 148A(b) of the Income Tax...

Expenses Of Solid Waste Disposal Is An Accrued Liability As It Was Disposed At Temporary Site: ITAT Allows Claim Worth Rs. 7.77 Crores

The Ahmedabad Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has allowed the assessee’s claim of Rs. 7,77,73,600 as a provision for expenses of solid waste disposal.The two-member bench of Siddhartha Nauthiyal (judicial member) and Annapurna Gupta (accountant member) has noted that the assessee had booked the expenses for the disposal of the waste at the permanent site commensurate to the income that it had accounted for, on the basis of the actual estimation of the expenditures that were...

Service Tax Not Payable On The Amount Collected From The Member Units For Treatment Of Effluent Water: CESTAT

The Hyderabad Bench of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has held that service tax is not payable on the remuneration collected from the member units for the activity of treating effluent water.The two-member bench of Sulekha Beevi C.S. (Judicial Member) and Vasa VASA Seshagiri Rao (Accountant Member) has observed that as per Notification No. 08/2017-S.T. dated February 20, 2017, the service tax payable on the services by the operators of the common effluent...

Chokad Is Not An Industrial Input: Orissa High Court Quashes Order Imposing 4% VAT

The Orissa High Court has quashed the order imposing a 4% value-added tax (VAT) on the wheat bran (chokad) as it is not an industrial input.The division bench of Chief Justice S. Muralidhar and Justice M. S. Raman has observed that it was necessary for the Department to show that there was a notification issued by the State Government identifying ‘Chokad’ as an ‘industrial input'. In the absence of such notification, no inference could have been drawn that the "chokad" sold to NALCO was in fact...

Kinley Water Falls Within Water, Not Aerated Or Mineral Water, Comes Within Tax Free List: Orissa High Court

The Orissa High Court held that the sale of packaged drinking water under the brand name Kinley Water falls within the expression "water but not aerated or mineral water sold in bottles or sealed containers," which is covered under Entry No.39 of the Tax-Free List.The division bench of Chief Justice S. Murlidhar and Justice Murhari Sri Raman has observed that the packaged drinking water sold under the brand name "Kinley Water" is nothing but purified water.The respondent, Hindustan Coca-Cola...

Issuance Of SCN in Customs Brokers Licensing Regulations, Contemplates Dispatch Of Notice And Not Its Receipt: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court has ruled that the expression ‘issuance of show cause notice’ in Regulation 20(1) of the Customs Brokers Licensing Regulations, 2013 (CBLR), merely contemplates the dispatch of the notice and not its receipt by the Customs Broker, within the stipulated period. The bench of Justices Vibhu Bakhru and Amit Mahajan observed that there is a distinction between issuance of notice and service of notice and the words ‘issue’ and ‘serve’ are not synonymous. The said words...