Tax Cases Weekly Round-Up: 18 December to 24 December 2022

Supreme CourtSmall Tax Effect: Monetary Limit To Prefer An Appeal Before The Supreme Court Is Rs. 2 crores: Supreme Court Case Title: CIT Versus Swapnil Finance Pvt. Ltd. The Supreme Court disposed of the appeal on the ground of low tax effects. The division bench of Justice M.R. Shah and Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia observed that the monetary limit to file an appeal before the Supreme Court is Rs. 2 crores. Bombay High Court Bombay High Court Allows Deduction On Issuance Of Completion Certificate Case Title: The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax Versus M/s. Vardhan Builders The Bombay High Court has allowed the income tax deduction under Section 80-IB on the grounds that a completion certificate was issued by the competent authority. The division bench of Justice Dhiraj Singh Thakur and Justice Valmiki S.A. Menezes, while upholding the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), observed that there was no allegation by the survey team during the earlier survey conducted in the year 2006 that the assessee was not raising the construction as per the approved plan. It was also held that if there was any modification to a completed residential unit for which a completion certificate had been issued by the competent authority, the assessee could not be held responsible. Failure To Furnish Certified Octroi Exemption Form; Importer Not Ineligible For Refund Of Octroi Under Section 194(2) Of MMC Act: Bombay High Court Case Title: Hyprecision Hydraulik versus State of Maharashtra & Ors. The Bombay High Court has ruled that failure to furnish a declaration duly certified by the Octroi Inspector, would not render the importer ineligible for refund of Octroi Duty under Section 194(2) of the Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act, 1888 (MMC Act). The Bench of Acting Chief Justice S. V. Gangapurwala and Justice Arif S. Doctor held that production of a duly certified octroi exemption form is not a substantive requirement but merely a procedural requirement to enable an eligible party to claim refund of Octroi under Section 194(2), on imports made in pursuance of a specified contract executed with the Government. Delhi High Court Tax deposited During Search Not Voluntary: Delhi High Court Directs GST Dept. To Return Rs.1.80 Crores With Interest Case Title: M/s. Vallabh Textiles Versus Senior Intelligence Officer The Delhi High Court has directed the GST department to return the amount of Rs. 1.80 crores along with 6% interest as the recovery of tax made during the search was not voluntary. The division bench of Justice Rajiv Shakdher and Justice Tara Vitasta Ganju has observed that no recovery of tax should be made during search, inspection, or investigation unless it is voluntary. Delhi High Court Grants Interim Protection Against Retrospective Denial Of Concessional Rate Of Customs Duty To Solar Units Case Title: ReNew Hans Urja Pvt. Ltd. vs. Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs The Delhi High Court has granted interim protection against the retrospective denial of the vested right of the benefit of concessional rate of duty under project import regulations granted to solar power developers. The Division Bench of Justice Rajiv Shakdher and Justice Tara Vitasta Ganju have directed the customs authorities to refrain from taking any precipitative steps at the time of import of goods pursuant to the registration of contracts under the Project Import Regulations, 1986. Age At The Time Of Commission Of Offence Has To Be Taken And Not When The Proceedings Initiated: Delhi High Court Case Title: Rajinder Kumar Versus State The Delhi High Court upheld the prosecution for an undisclosed foreign bank account, observing that the age at the time of the offense must be taken into account, not when the proceedings were initiated. The single judge bench of Justice Suresh Kumar Kait has relied on the decision of the Delhi High Court in the case of Pradip Burman vs. Income Tax Office, in which it was held that Circular/Instruction No. 5051 dated 07.02.1991 issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) does not bar the initiation of prosecution for those who have attained the age of 70 years. Bombay High Court Technical Consideration Cannot Come In The Way Of Substantial Justice: Bombay High Condones ITR-filing Delay Case Title: M/s Bhatewara Associates Versus Union Of India The Bombay High Court has condoned a year-long delay in filing the Income Tax Return (ITR) over "genuine hardships." The division bench of Justice Dhiraj Singh Thakur and Justice Abhay Ahuja has observed that technical considerations cannot come in the way of substantial justice. It is neither an allegation of malafide nor an allegation that the delay has been deliberate. Karnataka High Court Interest on Tax Refund Payable On Expiry Of 3 Months From The Date Of Refund Application: Karnataka High...

Tax Cases Weekly Round-Up: 18 December to 24 December 2022

Mariya Paliwala

Tags