Tax
Assessment Proceedings Against Deceased Person Invalid Without Notice To Legal Heirs U/S 93 Of CGST Act: Kerala High Court
The Kerala High Court stated that assessment proceedings against deceased person invalid without notice to legal heirs under Section 93 CGST Act. Justice Ziyad Rahman A.A. addressed the issue where the wife of the deceased, challenged the GST DRC-07 summary order issued in the name of her deceased husband. The wife/petitioner has challenged the orders on the ground that, as the proceedings of assessment were commenced and completed against a dead person. Section 93 of the CGST...
Battery Packs Imported To Manufacture Phones Fall Under 12% GST Category: CESTAT Allows Samsung's Appeal
The Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal at Delhi has held that lithium-ion batteries used for the manufacture of mobile phones up to March 31, 2020 would attract 12% GST.A Bench of Justice Dilip Gupta (President) and Hemambika R. Priya (Technical Member) added that if lithium-ion batteries were not used in the manufacture of mobile phones, they would attract 28% GST up to July 26, 2018 and 18% GST thereafter until March 31, 2020.The issue before the Tribunal was with respect to...
Tax Weekly Round-Up: June 23 - June 29, 2025
HIGH COURTSBombay HCBenefit Of Cash Compensatory Scheme Cannot Be Denied On Castor Oil Exports Based On Subsequent Test Change: Bombay High CourtCase Title: Sanjay Kumar Agarwal v. Union of IndiaCase Number: WRIT PETITION NO.872 OF 1994The Bombay High Court stated that benefit of cash compensatory scheme benefit cannot be denied on castor oil exports based on subsequent test change.The Division Bench of Justices M.S. Sonak and Jitendra Jain has observed that contracts executed prior to the...
Goods Confiscated U/S 130 Of GST Act Can Be Released During Pendency Of Appeal If Not Auctioned: Kerala High Court
The Kerala High Court has stated that goods confiscated under Section 130 GST Act can be released during pendency of appeal if not yet auctioned. Justice Ziyad Rahman A.A. was addressing the case where the grievance of the assessee/petitioner is against confiscation order passed by the Enforcement Officer/2nd respondent, under Section 130 of the GST Act. The assessee/petitioner dispatched certain scrap materials through a conveyance. During transit, the said vehicle was intercepted...
GST | Alleging Denial Of Hearing Insufficient If Assessee Itself Wasn't Diligent In Responding To SCN Or Attending Hearing: Delhi High Court
The Delhi High Court has refused to interfere with a demand order passed by the GST Department without hearing the assessee, after noting that the assessee itself was not diligent in responding to the show cause notice or attending the personal hearing despite notice.A division bench of Justices Prathiba M. Singh and Rajneesh Kumar Gupta observed,“Considering the fact that (i) The Department has given the show cause notice and the personal hearing notices to the Petitioner; (ii) The Petitioner...
Assessment Based On DVO's Valuation Cannot Be Revised U/S 263 Of Income Tax Act In Absence Of Concrete Material: Kerala High Court
The Kerala High Court held that assessment based on DVO's (Department Valuation Officer) valuation cannot be revised under Section 263 of Income Tax Act in absence of concrete material. Justices A.K. Jayasankaran Nambiar and P.M. Manoj observed that “as on the date of invoking his power under Section 263 of the IT Act, the Commissioner could not have had a 'reason to believe' that the assessment was erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue since the material to inform...
S.245C Income Tax Act Does Not Require Prior Cut-Off Date, Pending S.153A/153C Notice Sufficient For Settlement Application: Kerala HC
The Kerala High Court stated that Section 245C of Income Tax Act does not require prior cut-off date; pending 153A/153C notice sufficient for settlement application. Justices A.K. Jayasankaran Nambiar and P.M. Manoj opined that “when Section 245C does not prescribe any prior cut-off date for an assessee to satisfy the requirements for filing an application before the Interim Board for Settlement, and the only statutory requirement is that the assessee should have a pending 'case' at...
'Decalcified Fish Scale' Import Covered Under Advance Authorisation Scheme; Customs Cannot Deny Benefit: Kerala High Court
The Kerala High Court stated that 'decalcified fish scale' import covered under advance authorization scheme; customs cannot deny benefit. The advance authorization scheme enables duty free import of inputs/raw materials required for manufacture of export goods. Justices A.K. Jayasankaran Nambiar and P.M. Manoj observed that during the period subsequent to the period covered by the show cause notice, the assessee has obtained advance authorization for importing the same product...
S.75(5) Of CGST Act Contemplates A Maximum Of Three Adjournments, Cannot Be Construed As A Minimum Of Three Hearings: Delhi High Court
The Delhi High Court has held that the provision of maximum three adjournments that can be granted to a taxpayer during the course of adjudication proceedings, cannot be construed to mean that the taxpayer must be given a minimum of three hearings.A division bench of Justices Prathiba M. Singh and Rajneesh Kumar Gupta observed,“A perusal of Section 75(5) of the Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 would show that the said provision merely contemplates that the maximum adjournments shall be...
Assessee Can Seek Refund Of Unutilised ITC In Personal Bank Account If Business Is Shut Down: Calcutta High Court
Calcutta High Court recently directed the proper officer under the GST Act to consider ordering refund of the unutilised ITC of an Assessee to his personal bank account, as his business was closed and its GST registration stood cancelled.The Petitioner was aggrieved by a direction of the proper officer, though allowing the refund sanction to the tune of Rs. 68,66,238/- but, directing the amount to be paid to the bank account of the business— Edelweiss Rural & Corporate Services Limited.The...
Taxpayers Must Be Vigilant About Communications On GST Portal, Department Can't Be Blamed: Delhi High Court
The Delhi High Court has made it clear that if an assessee fails to respond to a show cause notice duly communicated to it on the GST portal, the Department cannot be blamed for passing an order raising demand, without hearing the assessee.A division bench of Justices Prathiba M. Singh and Rajneesh Kumar Gupta observed,“Since the Petitioner has not been diligent in checking the portal, no reply to the Show Cause Notice has been filed by the Petitioner. Thus the department cannot be...
Assessee Cannot Be Penalised U/S 271(1)(c) Of Income Tax Act For Merely Raising A Plausible Claim: Bombay High Court
The Bombay High Court stated that the assessee cannot be penalised under Section 271(1) (c) of income tax act for merely raising a plausible claim. The Division Bench consists of Chief Justice Alok Aradhe and Justice Sandeep V. Marne opined that “the claim raised by the Assessee for claiming deduction in respect of the crystalised liability towards additional bonus was a plausible claim. Whether such claim is tenable in law or not is an altogether different issue. What is relevant to...