Supreme CourtNo Service Tax Applicable on User Development Fee collected From Passengers by Delhi, Mumbai and Hyderabad International Airports: Supreme CourtCase Title: Central GST Delhi – III vs Delhi International Airport LtdCitation : 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 457The Supreme Court has ruled that the “user development fee” (UDF) levied and collected by the airport operation, maintenance,...
Supreme Court
No Service Tax Applicable on User Development Fee collected From Passengers by Delhi, Mumbai and Hyderabad International Airports: Supreme Court
Case Title: Central GST Delhi – III vs Delhi International Airport Ltd
Citation : 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 457
The Supreme Court has ruled that the “user development fee” (UDF) levied and collected by the airport operation, maintenance, and development entities from passengers departing the concerned airports, is a statutory levy, and thus, it is not subjected to levy of service tax under the provisions of the Finance Act, 1994.
Case Title: M/S. Tata Motors Ltd. vs The Deputy Commissioner Of Commercial Taxes (SPL) & Anr.
Citation : 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 443
The Supreme Court has ruled that a credit note issued by an automobile manufacturer to a dealer of automobiles, in consideration of the replacement of a defective part done by the dealer pursuant to a warranty agreement, is exigible for sales tax.
In 'Works Contract', Assessee Liable To Pay Service Tax On Service Element & Sales Tax On Goods Transferred : Supreme Court
Case Title: CC and CE and ST, Noida vs M/s Interarch Building Products Pvt Ltd
Citation : 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 393
The Supreme Court has ruled that the value of the service portion in the execution of the works contract has to be determined as per Rule 2A of Service Tax (Determination of Value) Rules, 2006, or as per the Works Contract (Composition Scheme for Payment of Service Tax) Rules, 2007 (Composition Scheme), if adopted by the assessee, and that the assessee has to pay service tax on the service element and can claim CENVAT Credit only on the said amount.
Case Title: Commissioner of Customs, Central Excise and Service Tax, Hyderabad vs Ashwani Homeo Pharmacy
Citation : 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 397
The Supreme Court has ruled that the classification of a product under the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985, cannot be changed merely on the ground of change of tax structure or tariff entries, without showing a change in the nature and character of a product or a change in the use of the product(Commissioner of Customs, Central Excise and Service Tax, Hyderabad vs Ashwani Homeo Pharmacy).
Case Title: Heinz India Limited v The State of Kerala
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 411
The Supreme Court Bench has held that prickly heat powders fall under the category of ‘medicated talcum powder’ and not ‘medicine’ for the purpose of sales tax under Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963 (“KGST Act”). Whereas, under the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959 (“TNGST Act”), prickly heat powder would be taxed as a cosmetic.
Case Title: M/s K.B. Tea Product Pvt Ltd & Anr vs Commercial Tax Officer, Siliguri & Ors
Citation : 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 428
The Supreme Court bench comprising Justices M.R. Shah and Krishna Murari has rendered a split verdict on the issue concerning the applicability of the doctrine of legitimate expectation where a tax holiday/ sales tax exemption granted to the appellant- manufacturer was stopped pursuant to the amendments made to the West Bengal Sales Tax Act, 1994.
Case Title: Union of India & Ors. vs A. B. P. Pvt Ltd & Anr.
Citation : 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 430
The Supreme Court has upheld the withdrawal of a customs notification which granted customs duty concession to “Rotary Printing Machine” of ‘single width two plate variety’, on the ground of indigenous angle, i.e., availability of the equipment in India. The top court remarked that the same cannot be characterized as an irrelevant factor for withdrawing tax concession.
Income Tax Act - Carrier of Goods Not An ‘Owner’; Bitumen Not A ‘Valuable Article’ Under S. 69A : Supreme Court
Case Title: M/s. D.N. Singh vs Commissioner of Income Tax, Central, Patna & Anr.
Citation : 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 451
The Supreme Court has ruled that bitumen cannot be treated as a ‘valuable article’ under Section 69A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The bench comprising Justices K.M. Joseph and Hrishikesh Roy made the observation while dealing with an appeal filed against the decision of the Patna High Court, who had upheld the additions made by the Assessing Officer (AO) towards the bitumen lifted by the assessee as a carriage contractor, which was allegedly not delivered by it to the consignee- the Road Construction Department of the Government of Bihar, as instructed.
Delhi High Court
Case Title: Fayiz Nangaparambil Versus Union Of India
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 469
The Delhi High Court has held that the Show Cause Notice was short of the necessary requirements as it did not contain any specific allegation.
Case Title: Prem Kumar Chopra Versus ACIT
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 468
The Delhi High Court has quashed the reassessment notices on the grounds that the department has initiated reassessment by deviating from prior views without any cogent reasoning.
Case Title: Centre For Policy Research Versus Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 466
The Delhi High Court has stayed the reassessment proceedings against the Centre for Policy Research
Case Title: Ideal Broadcasting India Pvt. Ltd Versus Union Of India
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 467
The Delhi High Court has held that taxpayers filing declarations under the Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme Rules, 2019 (SVLDR Scheme) cannot quantify the duty under indirect taxes.
Taxpayers Filing Declaration Under SVLDR Scheme Can’t Quantify The Duty Under Indirect Taxes: Delhi High Court
Faceless Assessment Is Not A Fundamental Right: Delhi High Court Dismisses Gandhis, Aam Aadmi Party's Pleas
Case Title: Sanjay Gandhi Memorial Trust Versus Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemption) & Ors.
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 446
The Delhi High Court, while dismissing the plea of Rahul Gandhi, Priyanka Gandhi, and the Aam Aadmi Party, has held that neither the e-assessment nor the faceless assessment scheme in any manner modifies the power to transfer cases from one Assessing Officer under a Principal Commissioner of Income Tax to another Assessing Officer under another Principal Commissioner of Income Tax who are holding non-concurrent charges.
Case Title: Carpet Export Promotion Council Versus Union Of India
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 434
The Delhi High Court has held that the summary rejection of the application under the Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019 (SVLDR Scheme) without affording the opportunity to be heard would violate the principles of natural justice.
Delhi High Court Quashes Penalty Order Under BMA On Failure Of Dept. To Consider Assessee’s Email
Case Title: Prateek Chitkara Versus JCIT
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 408
The Delhi High Court has quashed the penalty order under the Black Money (Undisclosed Foreign Income and Assets) and Imposition of Tax Act, 2015 (BMA) for non-consideration of the assessee’s email.
Case Title: Mohammed Akmam Uddin Ahmed & Ors. Versus Commissioner Appeals Customs And Central Excise
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 357
The Delhi High Court has allowed the appeals of poor daily wage earners against the seizure of goods without insisting on the requirement of pre-deposit.
Bombay High Court
Bombay High Court Upholds The Validity Of Goa Tax on Entry of Goods Act, 2000
Case Title: M/s Bharti Telemedia Ltd. Versus State of Goa
The Bombay High Court has upheld the validity of the Goa Tax on Entry of Goods Act, 2000.
The bench of Justice M. S. Sonak & Justice Valmiki Sa Menezes relied on the decision of the 9-judge bench of the Supreme Court in the case of Jindal Stainless Limited and another vs. State of Haryana and ors. which upheld the constitutional validity of entry taxes imposed by states on goods coming in from other states.
Case Title: Modi Car Agencies Pvt. Ltd. Versus The State of Maharashtra and Ors.
The Bombay High Court has directed the sales tax commissioner to determine the applicability of VAT on road tax, insurance premiums, and octroi duty.
Case Title: Sunil Wamanrao Sakore Versus Union Of India
The Bombay High Court has held that the money lying in the corpus of the revenue had simply to be adjusted by way of a mathematical exercise and benefit accorded to the petitioner under the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020 (DTVSV).
Case Title: TML Business Services Limited Versus The Deputy Commissioner of State Tax
The Bombay High Court has held that the action of the department in making the adjustment of a refund due to the petitioner while considering the application under the Amnesty Scheme without notice to the petitioner is in utter disregard of the well-established principles of natural justice and has caused grave prejudice to the petitioner.
Case Title: Chanchal Bhagwatilal Gokhru Versus Union of India
The Bombay High Court has quashed the reassessment proceedings triggered by a change of opinion as to the calculation of tax payable by the assessee.
Madras High Court
Case Title: M/s. Apollo Hospitals Enterprises Ltd. Versus Union of India
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 139
The Madras High Court has cancelled the cancellation of the customs duty exemption certificate (CDEC) issued to the Apollo Hospitals.
Case Title: Sundaresan Suresh Kumar Versus Assessment Unit
The Madras High Court has quashed the assessment as the assessee was given only 13 hours to reply to the show-cause notice.
Karnataka High Court
Case Title: Gameskraft Technologies Private Limited Versus Directorate General Of Goods
The Karnataka High Court has quashed the GST Intimation Notice to the tune of Rs 21,000 crore and held that online/electronic/digital Rummy games and other Online/Electronic/Digital games played on Gameskraft’s platforms are not taxable as "betting" and "gambling".
Jammu & Kashmir And Ladakh High Court
Case Title: M/S Power Grid Corporation of India Ltd. Versus Assessing Authority Sales Tax Circle D Jammu
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 105
The Jammu & Kashmir And Ladakh High Court has held that no sales tax is exigible for the supply of goods for erecting transmission lines, substations, and power grids.
Chhattisgarh High Court
Case Title: M/s Nava Raipur Atal Nangar Vikas Pradhikaran Versus The Union Of India
The Chhattisgarh High Court grants 3 months time to the assessee for depositing pre-deposit before the Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT).
Patna High Court
Case Title: M/s DEN Networks Limited Versus The State of Bihar
The Patna High Court has held that the power to collect entertainment tax would no longer vest in the state after the 101st Amendment.
ITAT
Case Title: Shri Jain Shwetamber Murtipujak Sangh Versus ITO (Exemption)
The Raipur Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) refused to grant the exemption under Section 11 of the Income Tax Act on the grounds that the trust e-filed the "audit report" in Form 10B beyond the date.
Case Title: Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Versus M/s. Kovai Medical Centre and Hospital Limited
The Chennai Bench of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has deleted the addition made towards short deduction of TDS and held that the relationship between a Professional Doctor consultant and the Hospital cannot be treated as an Employer-Employee relationship unless there exist specific Rules and Provisions in the contract of appointment between the consultant and Hospital.
NLU-Delhi Is Not Engaged In Business: ITAT Quashes Income Tax Penalty
Case Title: National Law University Versus Additional/Joint/Deputy/Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax
The Delhi Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has quashed the penalty under Section 271B of the Income Tax Act on the grounds that the NLU-Delhi is not engaged in "business" and exists solely for educational purposes.
Case Title: M/s. Stewart Holl (India) Limited Versus Assistant Director of Income Tax
The Kolkata Bench of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has held that the income of the assessee should be computed first after making the disallowance and whatever the resultant income only 40% of that income has to be treated as taxable income in terms of Rule 8(1) of the Income Tax Rules, 1962.
ITAT Allows Income Tax Deduction On Effluent Water Treatment
Case Title: Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. M/s. Viral Alkalis Ltd.
The Mumbai Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has allowed the income tax deduction on effluent water treatment.
Case Title: ACIT Versus Al Nasir Agro Foods
The Delhi Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has deleted the addition against the buffalo meat trader as the department has failed to prove sundry creditors to be bogus.
Additions Can’t Be Made In Absence Of Incriminating Material: ITAT Deletes Income Tax Addition
Case Title: DCIT Versus Bhavya Pankaj Shah
The Mumbai Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has held that the additions could not have been made in the absence of any incriminating material.
Once The Existence Of Goodwill Is Established, Depreciation On Goodwill Cannot Be Questioned: ITAT
Case Title: Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 2 Versus Blujay Solutions (India) Private Limited
The Hyderabad Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has held that once the existence of goodwill is established, depreciation on goodwill cannot be questioned.
Case Title: Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax Versus M/s. Pravardhan Seeds Pvt. Ltd.
The Hyderabad Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has held that when agricultural activity is conducted and seeds are produced, merely because the seeds were sold commercially, the basic agricultural operations also cannot be dubbed "commercial activities" and not ‘agricultural activities’.
ITAT Deletes Income Tax Addition Towards ESOP
Case Title: Unilever India Exports Limited Versus ACIT
The Mumbai Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has deleted the income tax addition towards ESOP.
Case Title: Anilkumar Champalal Jain Versus ITO
The Mumbai Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has imposed a fine of Rs. 2000 for being delinquent and lethargic in pursuing the matter before the tax authorities.
Case Title: DCIT Versus M/s. Parshwa Associates
The Mumbai Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has held that an AO cannot make additions merely on the basis of a statement without corroborating it with any other material.
Case Title: Ballabh Prasad Aggarwal Versus ACIT
The Delhi Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has deleted the income tax addition on account of long-term capital gains on the purported, notional, and fictitious sale of jewellery.
Mere Payment By Account Payee Cheque Is Not Sacrosanct : ITAT Disallows Exemption On Penny Stock
Case Title: Sangeeta Devi Jhunjhunwala Versus ITO
The Delhi Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has held that mere payment by account payee check is not sacrosanct, nor can it make a non-genuine transaction genuine.
Case Title: Manila Sahayak Gruh Udyogsaha Versus Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax Anand Circle, Anand
The Ahmedabad Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has allowed the income tax deduction under Section 80P(2)(d) of the Income Tax Act on the grounds that cooperative banks are also registered cooperative societies.
Case Title: Sh. Nirmal Kumar Minda Versus ACIT
The Delhi Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has deleted the addition and held that it is customary amongst married women to keep on changing the jewellery as and when new designs come on the market.
Case Title: Shri Devkripa Textile Mills (P) Ltd. Versus ACIT
The Jodhpur bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has held that there is no requirement for disallowing part of the director’s remuneration and depreciation when the business is stopped due to a temporary lull.
ITAT Allows Income Tax Deduction On The Interest Income Received From The Co-Operative Bank
Case Title: Oberoi Spring Co–operative Versus Income Tax Officer
The Mumbai Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has allowed the income tax deduction under Section 80P(2)(d) of the Income Tax Act on the entire amount of interest income received from the Co-operative Bank.
Section 14A Disallowance Cannot Be More Than Exempted Income: ITAT
Case Title: Royal Twinkle Star Club Pvt. Ltd. Versus Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax
The Mumbai Bench of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has held that section 14A disallowance cannot be more than exempted income.
Case Title: DCIT Vs Sylvannus Builders and Developers Ltd.
The Ahmedabad Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), while upholding the addition, has held that A.O. without rejection of books of accounts under Section 145 but estimated the income based on the Profit Margin Method.
Case Title: Sh. Pradeep Sawhney Versus ITO
The Delhi Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has observed that the department can bring expenditures incurred in earlier years to be taxed in subsequent years on grounds of bogus expenditure.
Case Title: The Board of Control for Cricket in India Versus Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax
The Mumbai bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has held that payment of compensation to Cricket South Africa (CSA) under the Termination Agreement is not taxable under the provisions of the India-South Africa DTAA.
Case Title: Integra Engineering India Ltd Versus Asstt. Commissioner of Income-tax
The Ahmedabad bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has deleted the addition and held that any adjustment for bad and doubtful debts amounts to actual writing off the bad debts.
Case Title: DCIT Versus Shri Basant R. Agarwal
The Ahmedabad Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has held that there cannot be any addition of the regular items that were disclosed by the assessee in the regular books of accounts.
CESTAT
Case Title: M/s Vanick Oils and Fats Pvt. Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Delhi- III, Gurgaon
The Chandigarh Bench of the Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has held that the penalty under Section 114 A of the Customs Act is invariably linked to the quantum of duty evaded.
Case Title: M/s Synergy Steels Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Customs
The Delhi Bench of the Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has held that just as an assessee cannot be permitted to evade payment of rightful tax, the authority that recovers tax without any authority of law cannot be permitted to retain the amount merely because the taxpayer was not aware at that time.
Department Cannot Decide Title Of The Goods When No One Disputes Ownership: CESTAT
Case Title: Apca Power Private Limited Versus C.C.-Kandla
The Ahmedabad Bench of the Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has held that the department cannot self-assign to itself the duty of declaring bad in law the certificate issued to the importer by the Ministry of Renewable Energy or decide the title to the goods, even when no one is disputing ownership.
Case Title: M/s.Viswa Industrial Company Limited Versus Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Kolkata-V
The Kolkata Bench of the Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has held that inspection charges received in connection with the sale of the goods are not includible in the assessable value in the absence of evidence.
No Excise Duty Payable On Amortization Cost Of The Cylinder: CESTAT
Case Title: Pvn Fabrics Versus C.C.E. & S.T.-Daman
The Ahmedabad Bench of the Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has held that no excise duty is payable on the amortization cost of the cylinder.
Case Title: M/s Mahavir Metal Manufacturing Company Versus Commissioner (Appeals), Central Excise and CGST
The Delhi Bench of the Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has observed that Rule 5 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 cannot be invoked to sanction the refund of unutilized cenvat credit lying with the assessee.
Case Title: Commissioner of Service Tax, Mumbai-II Versus Mail Order Solutions (I) Ltd.
The Mumbai Bench of the Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has held that the department has no right to file a revision application in case of refund or rebate of service tax on the export of services since no such provision has been made for Revenue to file a revision application.
Departmental Action Demanding Service Tax At Visakhapatnam Unit Does Not Warranted Any Action In Kolkata Unit: CESTAT
Case Title: Commissioner of Service Tax, Kolkata Versus M/s. Walzen Strips Private Limited
The Kolkata Bench of the Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has held that departmental action demanding service tax at the Visakhapatnam unit does not warrant any action in the Kolkata unit.
Case Title: M/s.Evergreen Shipping Agency India Pvt. Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Customs
The Delhi Bench of the Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has held that once the importers and exporters have been granted immunity from prosecution, fines, and penalties, and proceedings against them have come to an end, it is discriminatory and unfair to continue the proceedings against the co-notices.
Case Title: M/S Kvs Cargo Versus Commissioner, Customs (Export)- New Delhi
The Delhi Bench of the Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has held that the bank officials, despite verification, are not able to detect the fraudulent nature of the documents. How can one expect a Customs House Agent (CHA), who is not even a public official, to unearth the dubious plan of the exporter?
CESTAT Allows Income Tax Deduction On Account Of Octroi And Additional Sales Tax
Case Title: M/s Fresenius Kabi Oncology Limited Versus The Commissioner of Central Excise
The Chandigarh Bench of the Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has allowed the income tax deduction on account of octroi and additional sales tax.
Case Title: M/s Bhaurao Chavan SSK Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Central Excise & Customs, Aurangabad
The Mumbai Bench of the Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has held that the service tax paid on the insurance of plant, machinery, and equipment required for manufacture is admissible as CENVAT Credit.
Godrej Zymegold Contains Can Be Characterised As Fertilizer, Classified Under CTH 3101: CESTAT
Case Title: M/s. Godrej Agrovet Ltd. Versus Commissioner of CGST, Kolhapur
The Mumbai Bench of the Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has held that Godrej Zymegold, which contains nitrogen and chlorine, suffices to characterize the product as fertilizer, classified under CTH 3101.
CESTAT Allows Refund Claim For Services Provided To The Regional Cancer Centre
Case Title: M/s Fresenius Kabi Oncology Limited Versus The Commissioner of Central Excise
The Chandigarh Bench of the Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has allowed the income tax deduction on account of octroi and additional sales tax.
The Bench of S. S. Garg (Judicial Member) and P. Anjani Kumar (Technical Member) has observed that the gist of the SCNs was to deny the deduction on account of Octroi and Additional Sales Tax for the reason that the same is claimed on an equal basis, even though paid on some non-excisable goods.
CESTAT Appeal Abates From The Date Of Approval Of The Resolution Plan By The NCLT: CESTAT
Case Title: M/s Jet Airways (India) Limited Versus Commissioner of Service Tax-V, Mumbai
The Mumbai Bench of the Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has held that from the date of approval of the resolution plan by the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLT), the appeal filed by the applicant has abated, and CESTAT has become functus officio in the matters relating to the appeal filed by Jet Airways.
Refund Cannot Be Denied To Any Person Who Has Borne The Incidence Of Tax: CESTAT
Case Title: M/s Quality Builders & Contractor Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Jaipur-II
The Delhi Bench of the Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has held that a refund cannot be denied to any person who has borne the incidence of tax.
Penal Provision Of Central Excise Rules, 1944 Cannot Be Invoked Against The Accountant: CESTAT
Case Title: Nitin M Dhandhukia Versus C.C.E.-Ahmedabad-ii
The Ahmedabad Bench of the Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has held that the penal provision of Rule 209 A of the Central Excise Rules, 1944, cannot be invoked against a person who is only involved in maintaining the accounts of the company.
Case Title: Messrs Aarvee Denims & Exports Ltd Versus C.S.T.-Service Tax - Ahmedabad
The Ahmedabad Bench of the Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has held that the second show cause notice should have been for a normal period of demand and the department should not have invoked the extended time period for demanding service tax.
Case Title: Mody Education Foundation Versus Commissioner of Central Excise
The Delhi Bench of the Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has held that service tax is not payable on education services by way of preschool education and education up to higher secondary school.
Case Title: M/s.Oriental Trimex Limited Versus Commissioner of Customs (Import)
The Delhi Bench of the Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has allowed interest on the auction sale proceeds from the date the amount was received by the Customs Department until the date of disbursal.
Case Title: M/s Commissioner of Central Goods And Service Tax, Excise Customs, Udaipur Versus Sonex Marmo Grani Pvt Ltd
The Delhi Bench of the Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has held that there has to be excise duty demanded from the job worker and not from the principal manufacturer when transactions between the two are on a principal-to-principal basis.
Value Of Sale Of Books Cannot Be Included In The Value Of Coaching Services, No Service Tax Payable: CESTAT
Case Title: M/s. Kanhaiya Singh Vision Classes Private Limited Versus Commissioner of CGST & CX, Patna-I Commissionerate
The Kolkata Bench of Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has held that the value of the sale of books cannot be included in the value of coaching services and service tax is not payable.
Bagasse Is An Agricultural Waste: CESTAT Quashes Excise Duty
Case Title: M/s. Vithal Corporation Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Customs Excise & Service Tax
The Mumbai Bench of the Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), while quashing the excise duty, held that bagasse, being an agricultural waste or residue, could not be manufactured.
CENVAT Credit Is Not Admissible On Input Services Attributable To Trading Activity: CESTAT
Case Title: M/s Woodward Governor India Limited Versus Commissioner of Central Excise
The Chandigarh Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has held that CENVAT credit is not admissible on input services attributable to trading activity.
‘Input Service’ Include Any Service Received In Or In Relation To Setting Up, Modernisation, Renovation Or Repair Of The Factory Premises: CESTAT Allows Cenvat Credit
Case Title: M/s Rico Auto Industries Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Excise
The Chandigarh Bench of the Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has held that the construction services and other services that are necessary for the renting of the business fall under the definition of ‘input service’ as provided under Rule 2(l) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004.
Case Title: M/s. M.P. Audyogik Kendra Vikas Nigam Versus Principal Commissioner of Central Goods & Service Tax and Central Excise
The Delhi Bench of the Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has held that demand under service tax on reverse charge mechanisms has to be worked out and calculated transaction-wise and invoice-wise.
Interest On Delayed Service Tax Refund Payable On Expiry Of 3 Months From Application: CESTAT
Case Title: M/s Champion Flavours, Meerut Versus Commissioner CGST, Jammu
The Chandigarh Bench of the Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has held that interest on delayed service tax refunds is payable on the expiration of 3 months from the date of application.
AAAR
Appellant’s Name: Indian Hume Pipes Company Ltd
The Uttar Pradesh Appellate Authority of Advance Ruling (AAAR) has held that Uttar Pradesh Jal Nigam (UPJN) is not a local authority and 18% GST is payable on the works-contract services.
AAR
ITC Not Allowable On Construction Of Shed Using Prefabricated Technology: Telangana AAR
Applicant’s Name: M/s. Sanghi Enterprises
The Telangana Authority of Advance Ruling (AAR) has held that input tax credit (ITC) is allowed for the construction of sheds using prefabricated technology.
Inter-State Supply Of Ambulances To Tripura Government Attracts 28% IGST: AAR
Applicant’s Name: Raminfo Limited
The Telangana Authority of Advance Ruling (AAR) has held that the supply of ambulances to the Tripura government attracts 28% IGST as it is an interstate supply.
12% GST Payable On Accommodation Building Located Outside The Boundary Of The Religious Place: AAR
Applicant’s Name: Nandini Ashram Trust
The Ahmedabad Bench of the Authority of Advance Ruling (AAR) has ruled that GST is payable on accommodation buildings located outside the boundary of the religious place.
Applicant’s Name: M/s. Foodsutra Art Of Spices Private Limited
The Telangana Authority of Advance Ruling (AAR) has ruled that 18% of the commission will be deducted from the bonus amount as an intermediary.
GST Exemption On Architectural Consultancy Service Provided To Surat Municipal Corporation: AAR
Applicant’s Name: Ajit Babubhai Jariwala
The Gujarat Authority of Advance Ruling (AAR) has held that the "Architectural Consultancy Service" provided to Surat Municipal Corporation (SMC) for the construction of SMIMER Hospital and College Campus is exempt from GST.
No GST On The Difference Between Purchasing, Selling Price Of Second Hand Gold Jewellery: AAR
Applicant’s Name: White Gold Bullion Private Limited
The Karnataka Authority of Advance Ruling (AAR) has ruled that purchasing second-hand gold in the form of jewellery and parts of jewellery from unregistered individuals and selling it to registered or unregistered dealers after melting it in the form of lumps of gold cannot be subject to GST on the margin difference between the sale price and purchase price as stipulated in Rule 32(5) of the CGST Rules, 2017.