New Limitation Plea Without Records Not Maintainable Before CESTAT: Madras High Court

The Madras High Court dismissed an appeal filed by M/s Modern Engineering & Plastics Pvt. Ltd., holding that a plea on limitation cannot be raised for the first time before the Tribunal without supporting factual material on record. A Bench of Justice Anita Sumanth and Justice P. Dhanabal observed that limitation under Section 11A of the Central Excise Act, 1944 is a mixed question of law and fact, and cannot be examined by a court or tribunal in the absence of necessary evidence. The...

'Reason To Believe' Not Required To Inspect Seized Jewellery Under Income Tax Act: Calcutta High Court

The Calcutta High Court on 28 January dismissed a writ petition challenging inspection notices issued by the Income Tax Department for jewellery and bullion seized during a search operation, holding that the revenue authorities are not required to disclose the information or reasons that prompted the inspection, so long as it is undertaken for purposes permitted under the Income Tax Act (IT Act), 1961. Justice Om Narayan Rai delivered the ruling while examining a challenge to notices issued...

Economic Survey 2025-26: GST 2.0 Delivers Stable Revenue As Transactions Rise

The Economic Survey 2025–26 said GST revenues remained steady following rate rationalisation under the GST 2.0 framework.Gross GST collections during April to December 2025 stood at Rs 17.4 lakh crore, registering a year-on-year growth of 6.7 percent, the Survey noted. It added that GST revenue growth broadly tracked nominal GDP growth during the period. The Survey also pointed to strong transaction activity, with cumulative e-way bill generation rising 21 percent year-on-year during the same...

Economic Survey 2025–26 Signals Next Phase of Tax Reforms

The Economic Survey 2025–26, tabled by Union Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman on Thursday, sets out the government's next set of tax priorities, with the emphasis on simplification, greater consistency, and cleaning up remaining issues across the tax system. On the direct tax side, the Survey notes that the Income Tax Act, 2025, will come into force on April 1, 2026, and apply from the tax year 2026–27. Alongside this, the Survey points to efforts to rationalise the tax treatment of...

Stamp Duty on DRT-Monitored Auction Sales To Follow Auction Price, Not Market Price: Bombay High Court

The Bombay High Court has reaffirmed that stamp duty on a sale certificate issued pursuant to a court-monitored auction, including auctions conducted by the Debt Recovery Tribunal, must be levied on the auction price and not on a higher market value independently assessed by stamp authorities.A Single Judge Bench of Justice N.J. Jamadar held that once a property is sold through a transparent, court-supervised auction process, stamp authorities cannot reassess its value by applying independent...

Exemption Claims Under Kerala Building Tax Act Must Be Referred To Government: Kerala High Court

The Kerala High Court on 14 January held that when a claim for exemption under the Kerala Building Tax Act is raised, statutory authorities are obliged to refer the matter to the State Government and cannot independently reject the claim while completing assessment proceedings. The ruling was delivered by Justice Ziyad Rahman A.A. while allowing a writ petition filed by M/s VPK Motors Pvt. Ltd., which runs a Toyota dealership at Kannur, challenging the levy of building tax on its premises...

Two-Year GST Refund Limitation Starts From Date Of Correct Payment: Kerala High Court

Earlier this month, the Kerala High Court held that the two-year limitation period under the GST law to claim refunds begins from the date on which tax is paid under the correct head, and not from the date of an earlier mistaken payment. The ruling was delivered by Justice Ziyad Rahman A.A. while allowing a writ petition filed by Pushpagiri Medical Society, a registered non-profit organisation running a hospital and medical education institutions in Kerala. The Bench observed: “The right to...

GSTAT Delhi Confirms ₹19.3 Lakh Profiteering Liability on Park Avenue After-Shave Distributor

The Delhi Bench of the Goods and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal (GSTAT) on 27 January directed sellers of Park Avenue After-Shave Lotion to deposit Rs. 19,32,446 into the Consumer Welfare Fund, confirming the revised profiteering allegations against them. The ruling comes after a major correction in the profiteering calculations, following the identification of duplication of invoices, which had caused the original financial demand to be overstated.A Bench comprising Dr. Sanjaya Kumar Mishra,...

Tax Recovery Officer Can't Void Third-Party Mortgages: Madras High Court In Sree Gokulam Chit's Case

The Madras High Court has recently set aside an income tax recovery order that had declared a mortgage created in favour of Sree Gokulam Chit and Finance, a chit fund part of the Gokulam Group, as void from the outset. Justice Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy held that the Income Tax Department can recover its dues by selling an attached property, but the Tax Recovery Officer cannot decide the validity of a transfer in favour of a third party. The court said the recovery framework does not permit such...

Gujarat High Court Sets Aside Rejection Of GST Appeal Over 13-Day Delay

The Gujarat High Court recently set aside an appellate order rejecting a GST appeal solely on the ground of a 13-day delay, holding that the appellate authority had failed to exercise its discretion under the law despite having the power to condone the delay. A bench of Justice A.S. Supehia and Justice Pranav Trivedi held that the delay fell within the additional 30-day condonable period available beyond the 90-day statutory limitation under Section 107(4) of the Central Goods and Services Tax...

Contractors Can't Be Made To Pay Past TDS Shortfall By Contracting Authority: Punjab & Haryana High Court

The Punjab and Haryana High Court recently held that Rail Coach Factory (RCF) cannot recover differential tax deducted at source (TDS) from contractors for past periods once the contractors' VAT liability has already been assessed and paid. A Bench of Justice Jagmohan Bansal and Justice Amarinder Singh Grewal was hearing writ petitions filed by G.S. Builders, Inderjit Bajaj and R. Tech Builders. The contractors had challenged recovery notices issued by RCF seeking to deduct additional amounts...

Tax Refund Must Be Determined By Nature of Service, Not Registration Mistake: CESTAT Ahmedabad

The Ahmedabad Bench of the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) on 23 January, set aside the rejection of a service tax refund claim filed by Dubond Infotech Private Limited, ruling that a clerical error in service tax registration cannot, by itself, defeat a refund claim for exported software development services. A Bench comprising Judicial Member Ajaya Krishna Vishvesha and Technical Member Satendra Vikram Singh noted that the company had mistakenly obtained...