Tax Cases Monthly Round-Up: July 2022

Indirect TaxSupreme Court 'Anardana' Be Classified Under Heading 1209 Of Tariff Entries Under Customs Tariff Act, 1975 & Attract 5% Custom Duty Till Revenue Takes Policy Decision Regarding The Same: Supreme Court Case Title: Commissioner of Customs And Central Excise, Amritsar (Punjab) v. M/s. D.L. Steels Etc. Civil Appeal Nos. 2360-2376 of 2009 The Supreme Court held that 'anardana' or dried pomegranate seeds would fall under Heading 1209 of the Tariff entries issued under the Customs Tariff Act, 1975, as classified by the Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, attracting a custom duty at the rate of 5%, till the Revenue takes a considered policy decision regarding its classification. The issue before the Bench comprising Justices Sanjiv Khanna and Bela M. Trivedi was that revenue authorities (appellant) asserted that 'anardana' falls under the Heading 0813 of the Tariff entries, and would incur custom duty at the rate of 30%, while the importers claimed that it is covered by Heading 1209 and attracts duty at the rate of 5%. Supreme Court Allows 2-Months Extra Window For Availing Transitional Credit; Directs GSTN To Open Portal For TRAN-1/TRAN-2 Forms Case Title : Union of India vs. M/s Filco Trade Centre Pvt. Ltd. and Anr. Citation : 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 628 In a relief to several assessees who missed the statutory deadline, the Supreme Court has directed the Goods and Services Tax Network (GSTN) to allow a 2-month additional window from September 1, 2022 to October 31, 2022 for claiming Transitional Credit. TRAN-1 and TRAN-forms were brought to allow assessees to carry forward pre-GST credits to the GST system. As per the GST Rules, such claims had to be filed within 90 days from the date when the GST Act came into force (July 1, 2017). Different High Courts passed directions for extending the timeline, against which the GST department approached the Supreme Court. Delhi High Court Voluntary Statement Made Before The Revenue Authorities Cannot Substitute A Statutory Pre-Show Cause Consultation Notice: Delhi High Court Case Title: Gulati Enterprises versus Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs & Ors. Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 604 The Delhi High Court has reiterated that a voluntary statement made before the revenue authorities cannot substitute a statutory pre-show cause consultation notice, as contemplated under Rule 142(1A) of the CGST Rules, 2017, as it stood before 15.10.2020. The Division Bench of Justices Rajiv Shakdher and Tara Vitasta Ganju dismissed the contentions of the revenue department that because the petitioner's authorized representative gave a voluntary statement before the concerned officer, the need for issuing a pre-show cause consultation notice was waived. Inapplicability Of MOOWR Scheme On Solar Power Generating Units:Delhi High Court Says No Coercive Action Case Title: ACME Heergarh Powertech Private Limited vs. Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs and Anr. The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Rajiv Shakdher and Justice Tara Vitasta Ganju issued notice and restrained the customs officer from taking any coercive action against the petitioners assailing the legality of Board Instruction No. 13/2022 dated 9.07.2022. The instruction was issued by the CBIC with regards to the inapplicability of the Manufacturing and Other Operations in Warehouse (no. 2) Regulations, 2019 (MOOWR Scheme) on solar power generating units. Inapplicability Of MOOWR Scheme On Solar Power Generating Units:Delhi High Court Stays SCN Seeking To Revoke MOOWR License Case Title: ACME Heergarh Powertech Private Limited vs. Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs and Anr. The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Rajiv Shakdher and Justice Vitasta Ganju has stayed the show cause notice issued by the commissioner to revoke the licence under the Manufacturing and Other Operations in Warehouse (no. 2) Regulations, 2019 (MOOWR). Bombay High Court Mandatory Pre-Deposit U/S 129E of the Customs Act Is Constitutional: Bombay High Court Case Title: United Projects Versus The State of Maharashtra The Bombay High Court has ruled that by virtue of section 129E of the Customs Act, the right to appeal is a conditional right. The legislature, in its wisdom, has imposed a condition of deposit of a percentage of duty demanded or penalty levied or both. The three-judge bench of Justice R.D. Dhanuka, Justice Nitin W. Sambre, and Justice Abhay Ahuja has observed that the fiscal legislation can very well stipulate as a requirement of law a mandatory pre-deposit as a condition precedent for an appeal to be entertained by the appellate authority. Thus, section 129E of the Customs Act cannot be held to be unconstitutional. Roaming Services And International Long Distance Services Provided By Vodafone Idea To ForeignTelecom Operators Is An Export Of Service: Bombay High Court Case...

Tax Cases Monthly Round-Up: July 2022

Mariya Paliwala

Tags