LiveLawBiz: Business Law Daily Round-Up: December 07, 2025

TAX Madras HC Quashes SCNs Against Apollo Tyres & MRF; Says S.74 GST Act Cannot Be Invoked When Tax Was Paid Voluntarily GST Demand Cannot Exceed Amount Mentioned In Show Cause Notice: J&K& L High Court ITAT Cannot Re-Adjudicate Issues Under Guise Of Rectification U/S 254(2)Income Tax Act: Madras High Court Manufacturing& Packaging Of Cement Not Civil Construction Activities; CENVAT Credit Cannot Be Denied: CESTAT Bangalore Income Tax Act | CIT(A) Can't Remand Matter Back...

Madras HC Quashes SCNs Against Apollo Tyres & MRF; Says S.74 GST Act Cannot Be Invoked When Tax Was Paid Voluntarily

The Madras High Court has quashed Show Cause Notices issued to Apollo Tyres Limited and MRF Limited alleging wrongful availment of Input Tax Credit (ITC) for the composite supply of Tyres, Tubes and Flaps (TFF) since tax difference was paid voluntarily. In twin judgments dated November 28,2025, Justice Krishnan Ramasamy examined if Show Cause Notice had fulfilled the ingredients of Section 74 to hold that payment deferred due to confusion prevailing confusion in the industry regarding...

GST Demand Cannot Exceed Amount Mentioned In Show Cause Notice: J&K&L High Court

The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court has held that a tax demand under GST cannot exceed the amount mentioned in the show cause notice and that doing so violates basic principles of fairness. The Division Bench of Justice Sanjeev Kumar and Justice Sanjay Parihar set aside a GST demand raised against a goods transport agency (GTA), after finding that the final demand was much higher than what was proposed in the original notice. The Goods Transport Agency challenged a show...

ITAT Cannot Re-Adjudicate Issues Under Guise Of Rectification U/S 254(2) Income Tax Act: Madras High Court

The Madras High Court has held that the rectification power under Section 254(2) of the Income Tax Act is akin to the review power under Order 47 Rule 1 CPC and is limited to rectifying any mistake apparent on the face of the record. The Tribunal cannot re-adjudicate issues or modify its original order under the guise of rectification. Section 254(2) of the Indian Income Tax Act, 1961, grants the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) the authority to amend its orders to rectify any...

Manufacturing & Packaging Of Cement Not Civil Construction Activities; CENVAT Credit Cannot Be Denied: CESTAT Bangalore

The Bangalore Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has stated that manufacturing and packaging of cement are works service contracts, not civil construction activities, and therefore CENVAT (Central Value Added Tax) Credit cannot be denied. Regarding the allegation of ineligible CENVAT credit availed by the assessee on lease premium, the bench consists of P.A. Augustian (Judicial Member) and Pullela Nageswara Rao (Technical Member) found that since the...

Income Tax Act | CIT(A) Can't Remand Matter Back To AO Without Deciding Jurisdictional Validity Of S.144 Order: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court has made it clear that the Commissioner of Income Tax Appeals cannot remand assessment back to the Assessing Officer, unless it decides the jurisdictional validity of AO's order passed under Section 144 of the Income Tax Act 1961.Section 144 empowers the deals with the assessment of a taxpayer that is carried out by the Assessing Officer (AO) as per his best judgement and based on all relevant information gathered.In the case at hand, the Appellant-assessee argued that the...

Income Tax Act | No Error In Issuing Successive Reassessment Notices On Same 'Reasons To Believe': Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court has refused to interfere with income reassessment action initiated by the tax authorities merely on the ground that two successive notices under Section 148A(1) of the Income Tax Act 1961 were issued to the assessee.A division bench of Justices V. Kameswar Rao and Vinod Kumar observed,“as the fresh notice dated 13.06.2025 was issued with the same contents, the previous notice automatically becomes infructuous. Thus, no jurisdictional issue arises.”Briefly put, the Department...

Paddy Is An Agricultural Produce, No GST Leviable On Rent Received For Its Storage: Tamil Nadu AAR

The Tamil Nadu Authority for Advance Ruling (AAR) has ruled that rent received for letting out a godown to store paddy does not attract Goods and Services Tax (GST), as paddy qualifies as an agricultural produce. The ruling was passed on an advance ruling application filed by M/s Lena Modern Rice Mill, owned by Lakshmanan Sivalingam, which had rented out its premises for use as a godown to store paddy. The tenant had refused to pay GST on the rent, prompting the applicant to seek...

LiveLawBiz: Business Law Daily Round-Up: December 06, 2025

TAXServices To Marriott Hotel In Hong Kong Are 'Export Of Services': CESTAT Mumbai Sets Aside Service Tax DemandLimitation For ITAT Rectification Runs From Date Of Receipt Of Order, Not Date Of It's Passing: Bombay High CourtGSTR-3B To Become Non-Editable November Onwards: GSTN Issues FAQs On Return Filing, Advisory On Automatic Suspension Of GST RegistrationBombay Sales Tax Act | High Court Says Canned Pineapple Slices Cannot Be Classified As 'Fresh Fruits', Denies Tax ExemptionIBCMere Forgery...

Tax Monthly Digest: November 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...

Bombay Sales Tax Act | High Court Says Canned Pineapple Slices Cannot Be Classified As 'Fresh Fruits', Denies Tax Exemption

In a significant ruling on product classification under the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959, the Bombay High Court has held that canned pineapple slices, pineapple tidbits and fruit cocktail preserved in sugar syrup cannot be treated as “fresh fruits” for the purpose of Entry A-23 of the Schedule to the Act. A Division Bench of Justice M.S. Sonak and Justice Advait M. Sethna answered the sales tax reference in favour of the Revenue and against the assessee Sudha Instant Soft Drinks &...

GSTR-3B To Become Non-Editable November Onwards: GSTN Issues FAQs On Return Filing, Advisory On Automatic Suspension Of GST Registration

The Goods and Services Tax Network (GSTN) has informed that from November-2025 tax period onwards, value of supplies auto-populated in Table 3.2 of GSTR-3B from the returns/forms mentioned above, shall be made non-editable. In an advisory dated December 05, 2025, GSTN stated that in case any modification/amendment is required in the auto-populated values of Table 3.2 of GSTR-3B, then the same can be done through GSTR-1A for the same tax period. GST Portal provides a pre-filled...