“Gross Concealment”: Delhi High Court Imposes ₹5 Lakh Costs On Party In Poppy Seeds Smuggling Case

The Delhi High Court recently imposed exemplary costs of ₹5 lakh on the power of attorney holder of a company, purportedly involved in smuggling of prohibited items like poppy seeds.A division bench of Justices Prathiba M. Singh and Shail Jain noted that the Petitioner had failed to disclose that his challenge to the penalty order passed by the Customs authority was previously dismissed by the Court.“The Counsel for the Petitioner had a duty to disclose the relevant facts and the relevant...

Delhi High Court Grants Interim Relief To Aadhar India Over Non-Issuance Of Pre-Show Cause Notice Intimation In GST Case

The Delhi High Court, while examining whether pre-consultation prior to a GST Show Cause Notice was mandatory or discretionary, granted interim relief to Aadhar India by permitting the proceedings arising from the Show Cause Notice dated 29 November 2024 to continue, but directing that any final order passed pursuant thereto should not be given effect without further orders of the Court.The Division Bench, comprising Justice Prathiba M. Singh and Justice Shail Jain, heard a writ petition...

Customs Brokers Creating Fake Firms Jeopardise Real Exporters: Delhi High Court Forfeits ₹2 Lakh Over Alleged Duty Drawback Fraud

The Delhi High Court has ordered forfeiture of ₹2,00,000/- out of the ₹5 lakh security deposit made by a Customs Broker at the time of obtaining license, citing allegations of duty drawback fraud against it.A division bench of Justices Prathiba M. Singh and Shail Jain were dealing with an appeal preferred by the Commissioner of Customs against a CESTAT order, restoring the Respondent-broker's license and setting aside forfeiture of security deposit.The Department claimed that the broker...

Transfer Pricing Officer Cannot Cherry-Pick Transactions When Transactional Net Margin Method Is Accepted: ITAT Mumbai

The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) Mumbai has held that once the Transactional Net Margin Method (TNMM) is accepted for benchmarking all international transactions, the Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO) cannot cherry-pick only the management fee and assign an Arm's Length Price (ALP) at NIL. In the case in hand, the assessee had preferred an appeal before the ITAT seeking deletion of the Transfer Pricing adjustment on management fees and the consequential enhancement of income, being...

Affidavit Of Cost Accountant In Personal Hearing Cannot Be Ignored When Facts Are Admitted By State Tax Officer: Kerala High Court

The Kerala High Court has held that an affidavit by professionals, such as a cost accountant, given during a personal hearing, cannot be ignored, especially when a state tax officer admits facts referred therein. Justice Ziyad Rahman A.A. stated that when a professional swears an affidavit before this Court, highlighting the matters that transpired during the course of the hearing, the same cannot be simply ignored, particularly in a situation where, to some extent, there is an...

KVAT Act | Permission For Compounding Tax Cannot Be Cancelled For Suppression; Only Suppressed Turnover Can Be Taxed: Kerala High Court

The Kerala High Court has held that under the KVAT Act (Kerala Value Added Tax Act, 2003), the assessing authority cannot cancel permission to pay tax at compounding rates for suppression in the same year it was opted, and only the suppressed turnover can be taxed at normal rates. Justice M.A. Abdul Hakhim opined that cancellation proceedings are still pending, and the cancellation is not carried out, and the assessment is not concluded on a best judgment assessment basis. In such a...

Two Days Delay In Paying Last Instalment Under VAT Amnesty Scheme Owing To Technical Glitch Is Condonable: Gujarat High Court

The Gujarat High Court has extended benefit of Amnesty Scheme under the Gujarat Value Added Tax (GVAT) Act, 2003 to dealer who was precluded from making full payment under the Scheme on account of 'automatic' re-adjustment of instalment amount. The Division Bench, comprising Justice Bhargav D. Karia and Justice Pranav Trivedi set aside rejection of application under the Scheme noting that non-payment of differential amount was only due to technical glitches of the online portal. The...

Refund Of Capital Advance From Karta To HUF Is Capital Receipt; Commercial Use Of Capital Does Not Convert It Into Income: ITAT Mumbai

On November 17th, 2025 the Bench of Shri Vikram Singh Yadav (Accountant Member) and Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail (Judicial Member) of the ITAT Mumbai partly allowed the appeal holding that the disallowance under Section 14A (Expenditure for exempt income) r/w Rule 8D cannot exceed the actual expenditure of ₹69,455 incurred by the assessee, and that the excess refund of ₹1,26,32,970 received on return of capital advance retained its character as a capital receipt and could not be taxed as...

Punjab & Haryana High Court Quashes Negative Blocking of ITC Under Rule 86A; Holds Ledger Cannot Be Blocked Beyond Available Credit

The Punjab & Haryana High Court has quashed orders that disallowed debit from Electronic Credit Ledgers of taxpayers in excess of the Input Tax Credit (ITC) available at the time of passing of the said order. The Division Bench comprising, Justice Lisa Gill and Justice Meenakshi I. Mehta followed the principles judicial reasoning for blocking of Electronic Credit Ledger under Rule 86-A as enumerated by Gujarat High Court in case of Samay Alloys and thereafter by Delhi High Court in case of...

Rebate Under Rule 18 CER Cannot Be Denied Without Examining Duty On Exported Goods: Bombay High Court Remands Yamaha's Claim

The Bombay High Court has held that a rebate under Rule 18 Central Excise Rules, 2002, cannot be denied without determining the tax liability on exported goods, and has remanded Yamaha's rebate claim to the principal commissioner for fresh consideration. Justices M.S. Sonak and Advait M. Sethna were examining whether the India Yamaha Motor P. Limited was entitled to a rebate under Rule 18 CER 2002 read with Notification No. 19/2004-CE(NT) dated 6 September 2024 in respect of the...

Audit Assessment Under Orissa VAT Act Is Invalid If Audit Visit Report Is Time-Barred: High Court

The Orissa High Court has held that an audit assessment under Section 42 of the OVAT Act (Odisha Value Added Tax Rules, 2005) cannot be initiated when the AVR (Audit Visit Report) is beyond the limitation period. Chief Justice Harish Tandon and Murahari Sri Raman were examining whether the Assessing Authority has jurisdiction to proceed with Audit Assessment under Section 42 of the OVAT Act by issuing of statutory notice in Form VAT-306 on the basis of the AVR submitted under Section...

Cancelled GST Registration Cannot Be Restored Solely To Claim ITC Benefit U/S 16(6) CGST Act: Kerala High Court

The Kerala High Court has held that a cancelled GST registration cannot be restored solely to claim the ITC (Input Tax Credit) benefit under Section 16(6) CGST Act (Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017). Section 16(6) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, enables the taxpayer to claim the input tax credit available in the ledger, in case the order cancelling the registration is revoked by any order, either under Section 30 or pursuant to any order made by the appellate...