Tax Cases Weekly Round-Up: 28 January To 3 February 2024

Indirect TaxDelhi High Court Exporters Not Traceable, Customs Broker Can't Be Held Liable After Issuance Of 'Let Export Orders': Delhi High Court Case Title: Naman Gupta Versus Commissioner Of Customs Airport And General The Delhi High Court has held that as a customs broker, the petitioner cannot be held liable because exporters were not traceable after the issuance of 'Let Export Orders' and the export of the goods out of the country. Bombay High Court Goa Cess Act Is Not Subsumed By GST Laws: Bombay High Court Case Title: Sesa Sterlite Limited through Company Secretary Chandrashekhar D. Chitnis & Anr. Versus State of Goa through Chief Secretary The Bombay High Court at Goa has held that the Goa Cess Act is not subsumed by the GST laws. Calcutta High Court Dredger Accessories Rules, Vessel Still In Use, No Case Of Unjust Enrichment, Duty Not Leviable: Calcutta High Court Case Title: Commissioner Of Customs (Port), Kolkata Versus M/S. Dredging Corporation Of India Limited The Calcutta High Court has held that when the goods are still in use, the question of passing the burden of customs duty does not arise, and the question of unjust enrichment will not be applicable. Madras High Court Electricity Qualifies As Input For Grant Of CENVAT Credit: Madras High Court Case Title: M/s.India Cements Limited Versus Commissioner of Customs The Madras High Court has held that electricity qualifies as an input for the grant of CENVAT credit under the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2002 (CCR). Refund Claim Has To Be Examined Based On Documents Pertaining To Availing Of ITC And Export Of Products On Zero Rated Basis: Madras High Court Case Title: Flow Link Systems Pvt. Ltd. Versus The Assistant Commissioner (ST)(FAC) The Madras High Court, while remanding the matter, held that the refund claim has to be examined and determined based on documents pertaining to the availing of ITC as well as the export of products on a zero-rated basis. Allahabad High Court [Limitation Act] Allahabad High Court Extends Benefit Of Exclusion Of Time U/S.14 To Appeals Under S.107 CGST Act Case Title: Murli Packers Through Its Proprietor Rakesh Kumar Jain vs. State Of U P Through Secretary, Institutional Finance Case Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (AB) 52 On Wednesday, the Allahabad High Court directed the Additional Commissioner, CGST, (Appeals), Meerut, to grant benefit of Section 14 of the Limitation Act to the petitioner and hear the appeal filed under Section 107 of Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 afresh. CGST Act | Time Extension For Filing Appeal Against Orders U/S 73, 74 Can Be Extended To Orders U/S 129, 130: Allahabad HC Asks CBIT To Consider Case Title: M/S Veira Electronics Private Limited vs. State Of U.P. And 2 Others Case Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (AB) 54 The Allahabad High Court directed the Central Board of Indirect Taxes, Ministry of Finance to consider extending the benefit of extension of time to file appeal under Section 107(1) of the Central Goods and Services Act, 2017 to orders passed under Section 129 and Section 130 of the Act. GST | Show Cause Notice A Vital Checkpoint, Delineates Boundaries Within Which Any Authority Can Operate: Allahabad High Court Case Title: M/S Associated Switch Gears and Projects Ltd. Through Its Director Jawahar Lal Jain vs. State of U.P., Through Secretary Institutional Finance U.P. Govt. And 2 Others 2024 LiveLaw (AB) 57 Case Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (AB) 57 The Allahabad High Court has held that authorities cannot travel beyond the show cause notice to impose penalty on the assesee. Writ Of Certiorari Not Issued As A Matter Of Course, But Granted At Discretion Of Superior Court: Allahabad High Court Case Title: M/S Falguni Steels vs. State Of U.P. And Others Case Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (AB) 59 The Allahabad High Court has held that the writ of certiorari is discretion granted to a superior court to review and quash decisions of lower courts, tribunals, or administrative bodies and is not issued as a matter of course. GST | Technical Error Without Any Financial Implications Do Not Attract Penalties: Allahabad High Court Case Title: M/S Falguni Steels vs. State Of U.P. And Others 2024 LiveLaw (AB) 59 Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (AB) 59 The Allahabad High Court has held that mere technical errors under tax laws without any financial implications should not be grounds for imposition of penalties. CESTAT Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation Is State Transport Corporation, Do Not Fall Under Definition Of Rent-A-Cab Scheme Operator: CESTAT Case Title: M/s. Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (Salem) Ltd. Versus The Commissioner of GST & Central Excise The Chennai Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has held that Tamil Nadu State Transport...

Tax Cases Weekly Round-Up: 28 January To 3 February 2024

Mariya Paliwala

Tags