Tax
'Twaron Para Aramid Pulp' Classified As 'Textile Flock', Importers Liable For Higher Customs Duty: CESTAT
The New Delhi Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has held that Twaron Para Aramid Pulp is classified as 'textile flock', hence, the importers are liable for a higher customs duty. Justice Dilip Gupta (President) and P.V. Subba Rao (Technical Member) were addressing the issue of whether the Twaron Para Aramid Pulp imported by the assessee was classified under Customs Tariff Item (CTI) 5601 22 00 or under CTI 5601 30 00. The case was whether the...
Transfer Of Title In Immovable Property Doesn't Attract Service Tax : Supreme Court
The Supreme Court has clarified that an activity which merely involves the transfer of title in immovable property by way of sale cannot be treated as a “service” under the Finance Act, 1994. Consequently, such transactions lie outside the ambit of service tax.A bench comprising Justices JB Pardiwala and Sandeep Mehta delivered the verdict while dismissing an appeal filed by the Commissioner of Service Tax, New Delhi against M/s Elegant Developers, a partnership firm based in Allahabad. The...
Supreme Court Issues Notice On Patanjali Foods' Rs 2.97 Crore Excise Duty Refund Appeal
The Supreme Court has recently issued notice in an appeal filed by Patanjali Foods Limited (formerly Ruchi Soya Industries Ltd.) seeking a refund of Rs 2.97 crore charged by the tax department in connection with an excise duty dispute. A Division Bench of Justice Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha and Justice Atul S Chandurkar issued notice on both the main appeal and the application seeking condonation of delay. The appeal challenges the Karnataka High Court's judgment dated September 30, 2024, and...
Refund Claims Are Time-Barred Despite Non-Obstante Clause U/S 142(5) CGST Act: CESTAT Rejects Mahindra Holidays' Appeal
The Chennai Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has stated that the Non-Obstante Clause in Section 142(5) of the CGST Act (Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017) cannot override the limitation under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act. Ajayan T.V. (Judicial Member) and M. Ajit Kumar (Technical Member) stated that section 142(5) does not refer to overriding any particular provision, and hence the non obstante clause has to be examined and given a...
Tax Weekly Round-Up: November 03 - November 09, 2025
SUPREME COURTSupreme Court Dismisses Customs' Appeal Seeking Rs 93 Lakh Duty On Lulu Malls' Imported TrampolinesCase Title: COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS V LULU INTERNATIONAL SHOPPLING MALLS PVT. LTDCase Number: Diary No. 47976/2025The Supreme Court recently (October 31) dismissed an appeal filed by the Customs Department challenging the classification and valuation of imported amusement equipment, including trampolines, by Lulu International Shopping Malls Pvt Ltd.A bench of Justices Pankaj Mittal...
No Depreciation On SIPCOT Payments For Infrastructure Development, But Eligible For 5% Annual Revenue Deduction: Madras High Court
The Madras High Court has held that depreciation on payment to State Industries Promotion Corporation of Tamil Nadu Limited (SIPCOT) for infrastructure development is not allowed, but the assessee is eligible for 5% annual revenue deduction. Chief Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava and G. Arul Murugan were addressing the appeal pertaining to the claim of depreciation on the sum paid to the State Industries Promotion Corporation of Tamil Nadu Limited (SIPCOT) for the development of...
Disclosure Of Income & Payment Of Income Tax Do Not Bar Proceedings Under Benami Transactions Act: Kerala High Court
The Kerala High Court has held that disclosure of income and payment of tax under the Income Tax Act, 1961, does not preclude initiation of proceedings under the Prohibition of Benami Property Transactions Act, 1988. Justice Ziyad Rahman A.A. agreed with the department that the fact that the assessees have disclosed the income in the return and the same was proceeded against under the provisions of the Income Tax Act, by itself, cannot be a reason to interfere with the proceedings...
Aishwarya Rai Bachchan Gets Relief From ITAT Mumbai; ₹4.6 Crore Disallowance U/S 14A Income Tax Act Deleted As 'Unreasonable'
The Mumbai Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has deleted Rs. 4.6 Crore disallowance made under Section 14A Income Tax Act, against Aishwarya Rai Bachchan in a high-profile income tax case. Section 14A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 has prescribed a method for determining the expenditure incurred towards earning exempt income under Rule 8D by the income tax officer. The case was heard by bench comprising of Pawan Singh (Judicial Member) and Renu Jauhri (Accountant...
Auction Under SARFAESI Act Valid When Property Valued By Valuer Is Registered U/S 34AB Of Wealth-Tax Act: Madras High Court
The Madras High Court held that an auction under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI) Act, 1957, is valid when the property is valued by a valuer and registered under Section 34AB of the Wealth-Tax Act. Section 34AB of the Wealth-Tax Act, 1957, provides the process for individuals to become officially recognised valuers under the Act. Chief Justice Mohan Shrivastava and G. Arul Murugan opined that out of...
Supreme Court Dismisses Rs 244 Crore Service Tax Plea Against Bharti Airtel Over Employee Scheme
The Supreme Court has recently dismissed a nearly Rs 244 crore service tax appeal filed by the Commissioner of Central Goods and Service Tax, Gurugram, against telecom giant Bharti Airtel Ltd. The dispute concerned the company's Airtel Employees Services Scheme (AESS), which offered free or discounted telecom services to its employees.The appeal challenged a January 27, 2025 order of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), Chandigarh, which had set aside the entire tax...
Advertisement, Promotional And Management Service Payments Excluded From Customs Valuation: CESTAT
The New Delhi Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has stated that Advertisement and Promotional Expenses and Management Service Fees (APE and MSF) payments are independent transactions, and cannot be included in the transaction value of imported goods. The issue before the Tribunal was whether the advertisement and promotional expenses incurred by the assessee in India are required to be added to the value of the imported goods, treating the said...
Customs | Importer Cannot Be Penalised For Misdeclaration Merely Because Other Importers Declared High Prices For Similar Goods: CESTAT
The New Delhi Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has stated that an importer cannot be penalised for misdeclaration merely because other importers declared high prices for similar goods under the Customs Valuation Rules. Justice Dilip Gupta (President) and P.V. Subba Rao (Technical Member) opined that the mere fact that another importer had imported identical goods from the same overseas exporter at different prices does not prove that the assessee...