Bombay High Court Annual Tax Digest: 2025

Direct TaxNotice Issued To Non-Existing Entity Post-Merger Is Substantive Illegality, Dept Cannot Cite Technical Glitch: Bombay High CourtCase Title: City Corporation Limited v. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax CircleCase Number: WRIT PETITION NO. 6076 OF 2023The Bombay High Court stated that notice issued to a non-existing entity post-merger is a substantive illegality and not...

Film Broadcasting Licence Fees Not Royalty Under India–Mauritius DTAA: Mumbai ITAT

The Mumbai Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal has allowed the appeal, holding that the consideration received for granting non-exclusive broadcasting rights of Hindi feature films does not constitute “royalty” taxable in India under the Income Tax Act or the India–Mauritius Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement (DTAA). A Bench comprising Judicial Member Narender Kumar...

Delhi High Court Direct Tax: Annual Digest 2025

Co-Accused Can Apply Separately For Compounding Of Offences Committed By Company Or HUF Under Income Tax Act: Delhi High CourtCase title: Sumit Bharana v. UoICase no.: W.P.(C) 16701/2024The Delhi High Court has held that co-accused are entitled to apply separately for compounding of offences committed by a Company or a Hindu Undivided Family under the Income Tax Act, 1961.A division bench...

Customs | ELISA Kits For Food Testing Qualify As 'Diagnostic' For Exemption: Delhi High Court Grants Interim Relief To Importer

The Delhi High Court, in a matter involving claim of Customs Duty exemption on import of Enzyme linked Immuno Absorbent Assay (ELISA) Kits for antibiotic testing in food as 'diagnostic kits' will hear the plea by food safety importers in January 2026. Recently, a Division Bench comprising, Justice Prathiba M. Singh and Justice Shail Jain were hearing an appeal by the importer...

Tax Paid During Probe Must Be Refunded Once No Liability Found: Chhattisgarh High Court Allows Service Tax Refund

The High Court of Chhattisgarh has allowed a service tax appeal filed by an assessee, setting aside orders passed by the department and the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) which had rejected a refund claim as time-barred under Section 102(3) of the Finance Act, 1994 . A Division Bench of Justice Rajani Dubey and Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad was hearing...

LiveLawBiz: Business Law Daily Round-Up: December 24, 2025

TAX Condonation Must Be Considered Despite Deemed Service On GST Portal: Rajasthan HC Sets Aside Dismissal Of GST Appeal On LimitationCESTAT Mumbai Holds Amendment Of Bills Of Entry U/S 149 Customs Act Is Legally Recognised Mode Of Modifying AssessmentGSTAT Withdraws Staggered Filing Requirement for GST Second Appeals; Allows Unrestricted E-FilingIncome Tax | Revised 2024 Compounding Guidelines Cannot Be Applied After Case Attains Finality: Madras High CourtCentral & State GST Authorities...

Customs | Export Of Rare Earth Elements Like Garnet Barred: CESTAT Ahmedabad Cites Dept Of Atomic Energy Circular

The Ahmedabad Bench of Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has held that export restrictions on garnet, whether found along beaches or inland places without involving canalising agency i.e. Indian Rare Earths Limited (IREL) was banned. In a recent ruling, the coram of Dr. Ajaya Krishna Vishvesha (Judicial Member) and Mr. Satendra Vikram Singh (Technical...

Filing Appeal Before Wrong Appellate Authority No Ground For Condonation: CESTAT Allahabad

The Allahabad Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) held that the filing of an appeal before the wrong appellate authority does not constitute a valid ground for condonation of delay beyond the statutory period prescribed under Section 85(3A) of the Finance Act, 1994. Sanjiv Srivastava (Technical Member) opined that the assessee had been duly...

Ponchos Classified As Capes, Not Scarves; CESTAT Chandigarh Upholds Customs Reclassification, Higher Duty Applicable

The Chandigarh Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) held that imported ponchos are correctly reclassified under CTH 6102 as capes, rejecting the assessee's claim of them being scarves. S.S. Garg (Judicial Member) and P. Anjani Kumar (Technical Member) opined that when the expert has given a report on the impugned goods, the same cannot be brushed...

120-Day Timeline In S.132B Income Tax Act For Deciding Assessee's Plea To Release Seized Assets Not Mandatory: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court has held that the 120-day period prescribed under the second proviso to Section 132B(1)(i) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for deciding an assessee's request for release of seized assets is not mandatory, and a decision taken beyond the said period does not automatically become invalid.A division bench of Justices V. Kameswar Rao and Vinod Kumar was dealing with a...

Allahabad High Court Annual Tax Digest 2025

Direct Tax[Income Tax] Filing Of Form 10-IC Prior To Filing Of Return Not Mandatory, Delay May Be Condoned In “Genuine Hardship”: Allahabad High CourtCase Title: CELL COM TELESERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED v. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERSCase no.: WRIT TAX NO. 278 OF 2024The Allahabad High Court has held that filing of Form 10-IC prior to filing of income tax return is not mandatory and the delay...

Excise | Dietary Supplements Not Pharma Products, CESTAT Delhi Orders Recovery Of ₹1.63 Crore And Personal Penalty On Plant Head

The Delhi Bench, Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has held that Dietary Supplements were not food products, not pharmaceuticals, hence not eligible for area-based excise exemption. A Bench comprising Smt. Binu Tamta (Judicial Member) and Shri. P.V. Subba Rao (Technical Member), dismissed the appeal filed by Pharmaceutical Company by upholding demand of...