Tax
Customs Commissioner Cannot Reassess Duty On Warehoused Imports Cleared From Refineries Beyond His Jurisdiction: Gujarat High Court
The Gujarat High Court stated that the customs commissioner cannot reassess duty on warehoused imports cleared from refineries beyond his jurisdiction. Justices Bhargav D. Karia and Justice Pranav Trivedi agreed with the Tribunal that a proper officer having the administrative jurisdiction over the respective refineries where the goods were removed under section 67 of the Customs Act, 1962, only could have assumed the jurisdiction for reassessment and not the Commissioner, ...
Revenue Cannot Treat Sale Price As 'Tax Inclusive' Without Proof: Gujarat High Court Quashes ₹25.53 Crore Penalty On Coca-Cola
The Gujarat High Court, while quashing the penalty of Rs. 25.53 Cr. on Hindustan Coca-Cola, stated that the amount of tax could not have been bifurcated by the revenue simply because the sales had been inclusive of tax. The bench found that there is no evidence on record to show that the assessee had collected any amount by way of tax from its distributors, retailers or customers, as the sales invoice shows the 'Nil' tax in the sales tax column along with the fact that there was an...
Bombay High Court Stays DGFT Notification Changing Classification Of Roasted Areca Nuts; DGFT Issues Fresh Notification
The Bombay High Court has granted a stay on the Notification issued by the DGFT (Directorate General of Foreign Trade) seeking to alter the classification of “Roasted Areca Nuts”. Subsequently, on 15th October, 2025, the DGFT, having realised the mistake, issued a fresh Notification rectifying the same. Justices B.P. Colabawalla and Amit S. Jamsandekar were addressing a petition seeking a declaration that Notification No.02/2025-26 dated 2nd April 2025, issued by DGFT to alter the...
Indirect Tax Quarterly Digest: July - September, 2025
SUPREME COURTStem Cell Banking Services Qualify As "Healthcare Services" In Service Tax Exemption Notification : Supreme CourtCase : M/S. STEMCYTE INDIA THERAPEUTICS PVT. LTD vs COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE AND SERVICE TAX, AHMEDABAD - IIICase no.: CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 3816-3817 OF 2025The Supreme Court held that stem cell banking services, including enrolment, collection, processing, and storage of umbilical cord blood stem cells, constitute “Healthcare Services” which were exempted from service...
Supreme Court To Examine If Transfer Of Leasehold Rights Attracts GST
The Supreme Court is set to examine whether the assignment of leasehold rights constitutes a “transfer of land” or amounts to a “supply of service” under the Goods and Services Tax (GST) regime.A bench of Justice Pankaj Mithal and Justice Prasanna B. Varale was dealing with Centre's plea challenging a Gujarat High Court judgment that held that assignment of leasehold rights in land and building does not amount to a taxable supply under the GST Act. Before the High Court, M/s Life Sciences...
Direct Tax Quarterly Digest: July - September, 2025
SUPREME COURTForeign Entity Doing Business Through Temporary Premises In India Liable To Tax : Supreme Court Rejects Hyatt International's AppealCause Title: HYATT INTERNATIONAL SOUTHWEST ASIA LTD. VERSUS ADDITIONAL DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (and connected matters)The Supreme Court on Thursday (July 24) ruled that the existence of a Permanent Establishment (PE) is sufficient to attract tax liability for a foreign entity in India, even in the absence of exclusive possession of a fixed place of...
Gauhati High Court Grants Anticipatory Bail To Man Accused Of Passing Fake Input-Tax Credit Worth ₹199.31 Crores
The Gauhati High Court has granted anticipatory bail to the accused of passing fake ITC worth Rs. 199.31 crores, which was passed to 58 firms across 11 States using fabricated invoices totalling Rs. 658.88 Crores. Justice Kardak Ete was dealing with the case where the accused persons, led by Ashutosh Kumar Jha, had created a fictitious firm, M/s Siddhi Vinayak Trade Merchants, using forged documents, including a fake seal of JMFC Changlang, Aadhaar, PAN Card, and electricity bills. ...
Income Tax Act | Failure To Raise Timely Objection To Jurisdiction U/S 143(2) Bars Assessee From Challenging Assessment: Chhattisgarh HC
The Chhattisgarh High Court held that failure to raise a timely objection to jurisdiction under Section 143(2) of the Income Tax Act bars the assessee from challenging the assessment. Justices Sanjay K. Agrawal and Radhakishan Agrawal stated that the assessee also did not raise any objection regarding jurisdiction upon completion of his assessment. As such, the plea with regard to the territorial jurisdiction of the ITO was barred by virtue of Section 124(3)(a) of the Income Tax Act....
Revenue Sharing Arrangements Not Taxable As Service U/S 65(90a) Of Finance Act: CESTAT
The New Delhi Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has stated that revenue-sharing arrangements are not taxable as a service under Section 65(90a) of the Finance Act. The Bench of Binu Tamta (Judicial Member) and P.V. Subba Rao (Technical Member) stated that the agreement was purely related to the transaction of business whereby the assessee was actually performing the activity of operation of catering and was not providing any service of renting of...
Bombay High Court Directs Dept To Pay ₹71.31 Lakh Interest On Refund Of Illegal IGST Collected Under RCM On Ocean Freight
The Bombay High Court has directed the department to pay Rs. 71.31. Lakh interest on refund of illegal IGST (Integrated Goods and Services Tax) collected under RCM (Reverse Charge Mechanism) on ocean freight. Justices M.S. Sonak and Advait M. Sethna stated that admittedly, the Petitioner had paid the amount of IGST which the respondents utilized up to the date of grant of refund. Having utilized such amounts of the Petitioner there is no justification, legal or otherwise to deny...
Limitation Under Rule 68B Of Income Tax Act Does Not Apply To RDDB Act Proceedings: Kerala High Court
The Kerala High Court held that the limitation under Rule 68B of the second schedule to the Income Tax Act does not apply to RDDB Act (Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993) proceedings. Justice Mohammed Nias C.P. stated that Rule 68B of the Second Schedule to the Income Tax Act, 1961, has no mandatory application to recovery proceedings under the RDDB Act. It is also relevant that under Sections 19(22) and 25 of the RDDB Act, the Recovery Officer derives...
Statutory Interest Mandatorily Payable U/S 56 GST Act On Refunds Delayed Beyond 60 Days: Gujarat High Court
The Gujarat High Court held that statutory interest mandatorily payable under Section 56 GST Act on refunds delayed beyond 60 days. Justices Bhargav D. Karia and Pranav Trivedi stated that the provision of section 56 of the GST Act is a mandatory provision and the interest which is required to be paid under section 56 is compensatory in nature for delayed payment of refund which otherwise is not in dispute. In this case, the petitioner/assessee filed 05 Shipping Bills of Polyester...