Tax
Central & State GST Authorities Must Coordinate To Avoid Multiple Adjudications On Same Issue: Himachal Pradesh High Court
The Himachal Pradesh High Court, applying the Supreme Court's Armour Security case, held that once proceedings are initiated by either the State or Central GST authority, parallel adjudicatory proceedings on the same issue are barred under Section 6(2)(b) of the CGST Act. The Court directed both authorities to coordinate and ensure that the assessee is not subjected to multiple adjudicatory processes on the same subject matter. Justices Vivek Singh Thakur and Sushil Kukreja examined...
Income Tax | Revised 2024 Compounding Guidelines Cannot Be Applied After Case Attains Finality: Madras High Court
The Madras High Court held that once the assessee's entitlement to compounding had attained finality through earlier orders, then the Income Tax Department could not apply the revised Compounding Guidelines. Justice C. Saravanan referred to the Explanation to Section 279(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and noted that the new compounding Guidelines dated 17.10.2024 bearing reference F.No.285/08/2014-IT (Inv.V) would apply, only if a new application is/was filed in terms of paragraph 3.2...
GSTAT Withdraws Staggered Filing Requirement for GST Second Appeals; Allows Unrestricted E-Filing
The Goods and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal (GSTAT) has withdrawn the requirement of staggered filing of Goods and Services Tax (GST) second appeals, allowing appeals to be filed without any phase-wise or date-based restriction. Through an order dated December 16, 2025, issued by the President of the Tribunal, Justice Sanjaya Kumar Mishra, GSTAT revoked its earlier order dated September 24, 2025, which had mandated staggered filing of appeals under Section 112 of the CGST Act, 2017,...
CESTAT Mumbai Holds Amendment Of Bills Of Entry U/S 149 Customs Act Is Legally Recognised Mode Of Modifying Assessment
The Mumbai Bench of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has allowed an appeal filed by Drive India Enterprises Solutions Ltd., setting aside an order passed by the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals) which had rejected a refund of excess countervailing duty (CVD) paid on imported mobile handsets. A Bench comprising Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal Member (Technical) M.M. Parthiban held that once the Bills of Entry were reassessed and amended...
Condonation Must Be Considered Despite Deemed Service On GST Portal: Rajasthan HC Sets Aside Dismissal Of GST Appeal On Limitation
The Rajasthan High Court, in a matter concerning effective service of appellate order and consideration of condonation of delay application, has set aside order passed by the Appellate Authority. In a recent judgment a Division Bench comprising, Justice Pushpendra Singh Bhati and Justice Sanjeet Purohit on dismissal of appeal on account of limitation, emphasized that condonation of delay application must be judiciously considered. The Rajasthan High Court allowed the writ petition while ...
Rajasthan High Court Rejects Bail To Payment Aggregator Facilitators In ₹95 Crore GST Evasion Via Online Gaming Transactions
The Rajasthan High Court rejected the bail application of the applicants accused of facilitating large-scale GST evasion through online gaming transactions. Justice Sameer Jain stated that bail should normally be granted for offences under section 132 of the CGST Act, unless extraordinary circumstances exist, and in the matter at hand, there is GST evasion of approximately Rs. 95 Crores, which shall have writ large effects on the economy of the country. In the case at hand, the...
US Government Pension Received In India Not Taxable Under India-USA DTAA: ITAT Delhi
The Delhi Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal has held that pension received by a US national from a US government retirement fund cannot be taxed in India merely because the amount was received here, as the India–USA Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement (DTAA) grants exclusive taxing rights to the United States. A Bench comprising Shri Satbeer Singh Godara (Judicial Member), while hearing the appeal filed by the assessee for AY 2016–17, examined whether pension received from a...
Extension Of Time To Adjudicate SCN U/S 28 Customs Act Need Not Be Communicated To Importer: Delhi High Court
The Delhi High Court has held that the Customs Department need not communicate to an importer that the time for adjudicating a show cause notice issued to it has been extended by virtue of Section 28(9) of the Customs Act, 1962.Section 28(9) sets time limits for the Customs officer to finalize demand proceedings after issuing SCN for unpaid/short-levied duty, requiring determination within six months for normal cases (S. 28(1)) and one year for specific cases (S. 28(4)). The provision allows...
Income Tax | Govt Grant/Subsidy Under Rehabilitation Scheme Is Capital Receipt, Not Taxable As Revenue: Madras High Court
The Madras High Court held that the grant-in-aid/subsidy received by the assessee under a government rehabilitation scheme is a capital receipt and is not taxable as revenue. Chief Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava and G. Arul Murugan examined whether the grant-in-aid/subsidy received by the assessee from the Government under the rehabilitation scheme should be treated as a revenue receipt in the hands of the assessee or as a capital receipt, taking it out of the purview of the...
Supreme Court Direct & Indirect Tax: Annual Digest 2025
Judgments With CitationsDirect TaxMotor Accident Claims - Tax Returns Can Be Accepted To Determine Income Only If They Are Appropriately Produced : Supreme CourtCase name: New India Assurance Co. Ltd. V. Sonigra Juhi Uttamchand.Case no.: SLP (C) No. 30491 of 2018Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 18The Supreme Court, recently (on January 02), while deciding a motor accident compensation claim case, observed that monthly income could be fixed after taking into account the tax returns. However, the...
“Resources Completely Wasted Away”: Delhi High Court Fines Customs For Delaying Release Of Seized Goods Despite Order
The Delhi High Court has criticised the Customs Department for wasting public resources by withholding seized goods despite an adjudication order already having directed its unconditional release, eventually leading to avoidable litigation.A Division Bench of Justices Prathiba M. Singh and Shail Jain observed,“The present is a case which shows how the resources of the Customs Department are completely being wasted away in such matters.”The Court was dealing with a petition moved by a traveller...
Sunglasses Not Covered Under 'Spectacles' Entry; Taxable As Residuary Goods At 12.5% VAT: Punjab & Haryana High Court
The Punjab and Haryana High Court held that the sunglasses are classified as a residuary item, as they did not fall under any specified Schedule, and therefore are exigible to VAT (Value Added Tax) at the rate of 12.50%. Justices Lisa Gill and Meenakshi I. Mehta stated that sunglasses are indeed a distinct commodity, which is not covered under Entry 110 of Schedule B of PVAT Act and Entry 100-E Schedule-C of HVAT Act. In the case at hand, the case of the assessee/appellant was that...