Indirect Tax Cases Weekly Round-Up: 7 April To 13 April 2024

Supreme Court Supreme Court Expunges Gujarat HC's Adverse Observation Against GST Officials Case Title: The State Of Gujarat & Anr. V. Paresh Nathalal Chauhan Citation : 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 295 The Supreme Court (on March 12) expunged the observations made by the Gujarat High Court in an interim order that statutory protection of the good faith clause under Section 157 of the Goods and Services Tax Act may not be available to the GST officers who conducted a search operation in the instant case. Delhi High Court Proper Officer Has To Consider Reply On Merits And Then Form An Opinion: Delhi High Court Case Title: Canara Bank Versus Assistant Commissioner, DGST The Delhi High Court has held that the proper officer has to consider the reply on merits and then form an opinion. Madras High Court Madras High Court Restrains Dept. From Appropriating Interest Liability Against Eicher Motors Until Matter Is Taken Up By Appellate Court Case Title: M/s.Eicher Motors Limited Versus The Assistant Commissioner of Central Tax and Central Excise Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 159 The Madras High Court has restrained the department from appropriating interest liability against Eicher Motors until the matter is taken up by the appellate court. Allahabad High Court Entry Tax | Indian Made Foreign Liquor Not Taxable Under UP Entry Of Goods Into Local Area Act 2007: Allahabad High Court Case Title: M/S United Spirits Limited v. State Of U.P. The Allahabad High Court has recently quashed the assessment order taxing Indian Made Foreign Liquor under the UP Entry of goods into Local Area Act 2007 on grounds that it is not provided in the schedule to the Act. S.58 UPVAT | In Revisional Jurisdiction, HC Must Uphold Sanctity Of Judgments/Orders, Must Intervene Only When There Are Compelling Reasons: Allahabad HC Case Title: The Commissioner, Commercial Tax U.P. V. M/S Godfrey Philips India Limited While elaborating the difference between 'appeal' and 'revision', the Allahabad High Court has held that in exercise of its revisional jurisdiction, the High court must uphold the sanctity of judgments and orders and intervene only when there are compelling reasons to do so. Confiscation & Penalty Order Must Be Quashed If Quantification Of Stock Based On Eye Estimate: Allahabad High Court Case Title: M/S Eco Plus Steels Pvt. Ltd. v. State Of U.P. And 3 Others The Allahabad High Court has held that once the Appellate Authority has recorded a specific finding that quantification of stock was based on eye estimate and not in accordance with law, the confiscation order as well as the penalty order are liable to be set aside. S.16 UPVAT Act | Invoices, RTGS Details Not Sufficient For Deciding ITC Claim, Transportation Details Must Be Produced: Allahabad High Court Case Title: Commissioner, Commercial Tax v. S/S Soma Enterprises Ltd. Placing reliance on the judgment of the Supreme Court in State of Karnataka vs. M/s Ecom Gill Coffee Trading Private Limited, the Allahabad High Court has held that input tax credit cannot be granted based solely on invoices and RTGS payment details. UPVAT | Intention To Evade Tax Essential For Imposition Of Penalty U/S 54(1)(2): Allahabad High Court Case Title: Durga Steel Rolling Mills Thru. Partner Amit Arora v. Commissioner Of Commercial Taxes U.P.Lucknow The Allahabad High Court has held that intention to evade tax is essential condition for imposing penalty under Section 54(1)(2) of the Uttar Pradesh Value Added Tax Act, 2008. Jharkhand High Court Jharkhand High Court Allows Application for Revocation of Cancelled GST Registration Despite Expiry of Limitation Period Case Title: Abdul Satar Vs Principal Commissioner, Central Goods and Service Tax & CX (Jharkhand High Court) LL Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Jha) 56 In a recent ruling, the Jharkhand High Court has permitted the filing of an application for revocation of cancelled GST registration, despite the expiration of the limitation period. Placement Agency To Be Given Proper SCN On Alleged Failure To Perform Duties Coupled With Monetary Loss To JSBCL: Jharkhand High Court Case Title: Urmila International Services Private Limited Versus Jharkhand State Beverages Corporation Limited The Jharkhand High Court has held that Rule 15 of the Jharkhand Excise (Operation of Retail Product Shops through Jharkhand State Beverages Corporation Limited) Rules, 2022, and the corresponding clauses of the contract have to be restricted only to those situations where the placement agency has been found, albeit after hearing the agency, to have failed to provide manpower to Jharkhand State Beverages Corporation Ltd. (JSBCL), which has resulted in pecuniary loss to the corporation. CESTAT Freight/Insurance Amount Is Not Includible In Assessable Value Of Goods For Charging Excise Duty: ...

Indirect Tax Cases Weekly Round-Up: 7 April To 13 April 2024

Mariya Paliwala

Tags