[Finance Act] Retrospective Abolition Of ITSC Doesn't Nullify Settlement Applications Filed Between Feb 1 To Mar 31, 2021: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court has held that the Finance Act 2021, which retrospectively abolished the Income Tax Settlement Commission (ITSC), responsible for enabling compromise between the state and its tax payers, cannot create a void.For context, the Finance Act 2021 envisaged replacing the ITSC with a body known as the Interim Board of Settlements from 01.02.2021. However, the Act came into force...

Supreme Court Upholds Tax On Ink & Chemicals Used To Print Lottery Ticket; Says Their 'Deemed Sale' Occurs With Lottery Sale

The Supreme Court on Tuesday (October 7) held that the ink and chemicals used in printing the lottery tickets is a taxable item under the Uttar Pradesh Trade Tax Act, 1948 (“Act”). A bench of Justices JB Pardiwala and KV Viswanathan dismissed the appeal filed by an assessee, who is engaged in the business of printing lottery tickets and had been taxed on the value of ink and chemicals...

Delhi High Court Asks GST Appellate Tribunal To Examine 'Profiteering' Allegations Against Tata Play

The Delhi High Court recently asked the GST Appellate Tribunal to re-look into the profiteering allegations levelled against DTH services provider Tata Play.The direction was made by a division bench comprising Justices Prathiba M. Singh and Shail Jain while dealing with the company's appeal against the show cause notice and consequential order passed against it by the erstwhile...

CESTAT Quashes ₹56.47 Crore Customs Duty Demand On Dish TV Over Smart Card Classification

The Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), Principal Bench, New Delhi, recently set aside a ₹56.47 crore customs duty demand against Videocon D2H Limited (now Dish TV India Ltd) in a dispute over the classification of imported smart cards. A coram of Justice Dilip Gupta (President) and Technical Member P V Subba Rao quashed an order dated April 28, 2020, passed...

Tax Weekly Round-Up: September 29 - October 05, 2025

HIGH COURTSAllahabad HCWho Is Prescribed Authority For Appeal U/S 54 U.P. Water Supply & Sewerage Act? Allahabad High Court Asks StateCase Title: Hindustan Aeronautics Limited Transport Aircraft Division Chakeri v. State Of U.P. And 3 OthersRecently, the Allahabad High Court has asked the State to clarify as to who is the prescribed authority under Section 54 of the U.P. Water Supply...

Supreme Court Issues Notice To IndiGo On Plea Of Customs Dept & GST Council Against Ruling On IGST Exemption For Imported Parts

The Supreme Court on Monday sought a response from IndiGo's parent company, InterGlobe Aviation, on a petition filed by the Customs Department challenging a Delhi High Court ruling that exempted the airline from paying Integrated Goods and Services Tax (IGST) on imported aircraft parts that were repaired and serviced abroad.A Bench comprising Justice BV Nagarathna and Justice R Mahadevan...

Income Tax | Rajasthan High Court Quashes Repeated Orders To Transfer Case, Calls Revenue's Approach 'Rigid' & 'Adamant'

The Rajasthan High Court has come down heavily on the Revenue Department for being “rigid and adamant” to transfer the case of the petitioner from Udaipur to Delhi under Section 127 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, despite the coordinate bench's earlier decision that quashed the same order.Section 127 of the Act empowers the income tax authorities to transfer a case from one Assessing officer...

Pre-Show Cause Notice Consultation Not An Empty Formality, Mandatory When Demand Is Over ₹50 Lakhs: Bombay High Court

The Bombay High Court has held that pre-show cause notice consultation is not an empty formality; mandatory before the show cause notice (SCN) in demands above Rs. 50 lakhs. The question before Justices M.S. Sonak and Advait M. Sethna was whether a pre-consultation notice would be mandatory before issuing show cause notices where the tax demand exceeds Rs. 50 Lakhs. The bench...

Revisional Powers U/S 56 KVAT Act Are Limited, Clarificatory Orders Have Only Prospective Effect: Kerala High Court

The Kerala High Court stated that revisional powers under Section 56 of the KVAT Act (Kerala Value Added Tax Act, 2003) are limited, and clarificatory orders only have a prospective effect. Justices A. Muhamed Mustaque and Harisankar V. Menon stated that with reference to the power to issue clarification under Section 94 of the Act, the Commissioner has been empowered to hold...

Delhi High Court Orders Economic Offences Wing To Probe Alleged Forgery Of Customs Stamps At Airport

The Delhi High Court has asked the Economic Offences Wing of the Delhi Police to conduct an enquiry into alleged forgery of Customs stamps at the Delhi International Airport.A division bench comprising ​​justices Prathiba M. Singh and Shail Jain passed the direction after the Department claimed that the Customs stamp on an air traveller's representations in connection with their seized...

Voluntarily Filed Returns Cannot Be Revised Through Additional Evidence Under Rule 29 ITAT Rules: Kerala High Court

The Kerala High Court held that voluntarily filed returns cannot be revised through additional evidence under Rule 29 of the ITAT Rules (Income Tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963). Rule 29 of the Income Tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963 permits the Tribunal to admit additional evidence for any substantial cause. Justices A. Muhamed Mustaque and Harisankar V. Menon...

FIRC Need Not Match Each Transaction, Periodic Certificate Sufficient If Total Forex Benefit Proven: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court has held that a Foreign Inward Remittance Certificate (FIRC) need not correspond to each individual transaction and it may reflect a period as a whole, provided that the overall benefit being claimed is fully substantiated by the total foreign exchange remittance.FIRC is issued by bank as proof of international payments for exports.A division bench comprising...