Tax Cases Weekly Round-Up: 18 September To 24 September, 2022

Delhi High Court Reassessment Notices Issued Between 1st April 2021 To 30th June,2021 Not Time Barred: Delhi High Court Case Title: Touchstone Holdings Private Limited Versus Income Tax Officer Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 890 The Delhi High Court has held that the reassessment notices issued between 1st April 2021 and 30th June 2021, will be deemed to have been issued under Section 148A of the Income Tax Act. The division bench of Justice Manmohan and Justice Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora has observed that the re-assessment notice dated 29.06.2021, which has been issued within the extended period of limitation, is not time-barred. Karnataka High Court Export Of Software Embedded Into Hardware; Sale Proceeds From Export Of Hardware Eligible For Deduction : KarnatakaHigh Court Case Title: M/s. Subex Limited versus The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 373 The Karnataka High Court has ruled that where a software embedded into a hardware is exported by the assessee, the proceeds from export of the hardware component is eligible for deduction under Section 10A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, despite the fact that the hardware was separately invoiced and was not manufactured by the assessee, if the software cannot be used independently. Madras High Court GST Department Did Not Recognize Concept Of 'Working Day' And 'Holiday' In Matters Of Interception,Seizure, Detention: Madras High Court Case Title: M/s.D.K.Enterprises Versus The Assistant /Deputy Commissioner (ST) Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 408 The Madras High Court has held that in the matters of interception, seizure, and detention, the GST Department did not recognise the concept of "working day" and "holiday" since substantial civil rights of the parties were at stake. The single bench of Justice Anitha Sumanth has observed that neither the assessee nor the department could have the luxury of reference to a holiday to delay or protract the proceedings. The acts of interception and retention, though an invasion of the rights of citizens have been accorded statutory sanction in pursuance of the aims and objects of the Goods and Services Act. Thus, it was imperative that the intrusive acts be carried out in strict compliance with the statutory provisions. Madhya Pradesh High Court 'Mistake In E-way Bill Was Human Error' | Madhya Pradesh High Court Quashes Penalty Under CGST Act Case Title: Maharaja Cables (C/O Maxwell Logistic Pvt Ltd) Vs Commissioner (GST) State Tax Indore (M.P.) The Madhya Pradesh High Court recently quashed the penalty imposed under the Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 on a private company after the petitioner argued that the mistake while generating the e-way bill was an inadvertent human error. The division bench of Justice Sheel Nagu and Justice Virendra Singh, while allowing the appeal, observed that the mistake in the e-way bill was bonafide. However, the court said the authorities will be at liberty to consider the case of the petitioner for the imposition of a minor penalty while treating the mistake in question to be a clerical mistake as per Circular dated 14.09.2018 issued by the Ministry of Finance, Government of India. Jammu & Kashmir & Ladakh High Court GST Registration, FSSA License Cannot Be Granted If The Premise Is Under Dispute: J&K&L High Court Case Title: Parveez Ahmad Baba Versus Union Territory of J&K and others Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (JKL) 152 The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh has held that the GST Registration cannot be granted if the ownership of the business owner's premise is under dispute. The single bench of Justice Sanjeev Kumar observed that until the dispute is settled between the parties amicably or through intervention of the Court of competent jurisdiction, neither the designated authority under the Food Safety and Standard Act, 2006 shall issue the licence nor registration shall be accorded under the GST Act to either of the parties in respect of the premises "Samci Restaurant." Uttarakhand High Court Amount Paid Under Protest Prior To SCN , Consider As Pre -Deposit Under SVLDR Scheme: Uttarakhand HighCourt Case Title: Patanjali Ayurved Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Central Excise & Service Tax Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Utt) 36 The Uttarakhand High Court has held that the amount paid under protest, towards interest, prior to the issuance of show cause shall be considered as pre-deposit while disposing of the application for a waiver under the 'Sabka Vikas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019' (SVLDR Scheme). The single bench of Justice Sanjaya Kumar Mishra has observed that the statute does not make any distinction between the payment of taxes, interest thereon, or any penalty in the amount which has been deposited during enquiry, investigation, or audit shall be deducted while issuing the statement and...

Tax Cases Weekly Round-Up: 18 September To 24 September, 2022

Mariya Paliwala

Tags