Tax Cases Monthly Round-Up: July 2023

Indirect Tax Supreme Court Special Effects & 3D Conversion Services Are Not ‘Video-Tape Production’ Services Under S. 65(120) Of Finance Act, 1994: Supreme Court Case Title: Commissioner of Service Tax-IV vs Prime Focus Ltd. Citation : 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 561 The Supreme Court has upheld the order of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) that the 3D conversion services provided by the assessee, including services such as ‘imparting special effects’, ‘post production service’, ‘digital asset management and content service’ and ‘digital restoration service’, will not fall under the ambit of ‘video-tape production’ under Section 65(120) of the Finance Act, 1994. CTO For Enhanced Production Capacity Issued After SC’s Order Fixing Total Import Limit; Importer Not Entitled To Proportionate Increase In Import Quota: Supreme Court Case Title: M/s Sanvira Industries vs Rain CII Carbon (Vizag) Ltd. & Ors Citation : 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 497 The Supreme Court has upheld the decision of the Delhi High Court which set aside the increased quota allocated for import of raw pet-coke (RPC) based on the “Consent to Operate” (CTO) issued to the importer for an enhanced production capacity, after the top court’s order dated 09.10.2018. Self-Assessment Of Assessee Not Rendered Malafide Merely Because It Was Based On A CETSTAT View Which Was Later Overturned : Supreme Court Case Title: The Commissioner, Central Excise and Customs & Anr vs M/s Reliance Industries Ltd. Citation : 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 512 The Supreme Court has upheld the decision of the Ahmedabad bench of the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) by holding the demand for differential excise duty raised against the assessee, M/s Reliance Industries Ltd, as time barred. Revenue Dept Can't Recover Refunded Cess Amount Because Refund Was Based On A Judgment Which Was Later Overruled : Supreme Court Case Title: Commissioner of CGST and Central Excise (J and K) vs M/s Saraswati Agro Chemicals Pvt. Ltd. Citation : 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 522 The Supreme Court has upheld the decision of the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh (J&K&L) High Court where the court had held that the assessee was not liable to return the Education Cess and Secondary & Higher Education Cess in view of the law subsequently laid down by the Supreme Court in M/s Unicorn Industries vs. Union of India, (2020) 3 SCC 492. Delhi High Court Knowledge Is A Necessary Element For Committing Abetment : Delhi High Court Quashes Penalty Against Customs Broker Case Title: Rajeev Khatri Versus Commissioner Of Customs (Export) The Delhi High Court has quashed the penalty against customs brokers on the grounds that knowledge is a necessary element for committing abetment. Mere Pendency Of An Appeal Would Not Detract From The Excise Duty Refund Demand: Delhi High Court Case Title: M/S Goldy Engineering Works Versus Commissioner Of Central Excise The Delhi High Court has held that the mere pendency of an appeal or an order of stay that may operate would not detract from the obligation of any person claiming a refund to make an application within the period prescribed and computed with reference to the "relevant date". Bombay High Court State GST Dept. Doesn’t Have Jurisdiction To Retain Amount Of Tax On Export Transactions: Bombay High Court Case Title: Media Net Software Services (India) Pvt. Ltd. Versus Union of India & Ors. The Bombay High Court has held that CGST/MGST authorities would not have jurisdiction to retain the amount of tax on export transactions. GST Provisional Attachment Order Not Valid After Expiry Of 1 Year: Bombay High Court Case Title: Bharat Parihar Vs. State of Maharashtra The Bombay High Court has held that the GST provisional attachment order is not valid after one year. Assessee Entitled To Claim Depreciation In Respect Of Assets On The Actual Cost Of Assets: Bombay High Court Case Title: Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax Versus Dharmanandan Diamonds Pvt. Ltd. The Bombay High Court has held that the assessee is entitled to claim depreciation in respect of any assets based on the actual cost of the assets. Bombay High Court Allows IGST Refund On Zero Rated Supply Along With 7% Interest Case Title: Sunlight Cable Industries Versus The Commissioner of Customs The Bombay High Court has allowed the refund of IGST on zero-rated supply along with 7% interest. Gujarat High Court Gujarat High Court Directs To Release Seized Gold As Outstanding Demand Against Assessee Case Title: Praveenbhai Girdharilal Agarwal Versus Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax (Central) The Gujarat High Court has directed the department to release the 100.350 grams of seized gold as the assessee had no outstanding demand. Gujarat High Court Grants Assessee Permission to Pay Tax Liability in ...

Tax Cases Monthly Round-Up: July 2023

Mariya Paliwala

Tags