Tax
Drawback Not Allowed Where Refund Exceeds Market Value Of Goods: CESTAT
The New Delhi Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has stated that drawback not allowed where refund exceeds market value of goods. Dr. Rachna Gupta (Judicial Member) and P.V. Subba Rao (Technical Member) opined that if the transaction value (FOB value) is so high, that the drawback due on the goods exceeds the market value of the goods, then, as...
Digital Marketing Is Business, Not Profession; Audit Report Not Required For Turnover Below ₹5 Crores: Madras High Court
The Madras High Court held that digital marketing is a business and not a profession; and an audit report is not required for turnovers below Rs. 5 crores. Justice Krishnan Ramasamy stated that “Digital Marketing is the business for persons who carry out the said activities. In the event anybody carrying on the business of Digital Marketing with cash transactions both on the aspect...
ITC Not Available On Cess For Electricity Supplied To Residential Township: Chhattisgarh High Court
The Chhattisgarh High Court held that input tax credit is not available on cess for electricity supplied to residential township. Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal stated that the electricity generated is used in the course of or furtherance of his business, which is evident from Form G provided by the taxpayer(assessee), hence, the assessee would not be entitled for ITC to electrical...
Customs Wrongly Treated 998 Purity Gold Jewellery As Prohibited Goods Under Baggage Rules: Delhi High Court Grants Relief To Traveller
The Delhi High Court recently granted relief to a woman whose 998 purity (equivalent to 24 karat) gold jewellery was treated as prohibited goods under the Baggage Rules 2016, and absolutely confiscated by the Customs Department on her return to the country.A division bench of Justices Prathiba M. Singh and Rajneesh Kumar Gupta observed,“On the aspect of personal effects and jewellery,...
Failure To Notify GST Commissioner About Partner's Retirement Makes Ex-Partner Liable For Firm's GST: Punjab & Haryana High Court
The Punjab and Haryana High Court stated that failure to notify commissioner of partner's retirement makes former partner liable for firm's GST. Section 90 of the CGST Act, 2017 extends the liability in case of partnership firm to its partners as well. Justices Lisa Gill and Sudeepti Sharma stated that “intimation of retirement of partner has to be given to the Commissioner...
Trader Can't Be Labelled Defaulter Over Unpaid Demand During Pendency Of GST Appeal, After Making Pre-Deposit: Delhi High Court
The Delhi HIgh Court has held that once a trader prefers an appeal against a demand raised by the GST Department and makes the mandatory pre-deposit, the demand order is automatically stayed and the trader cannot be treated as a defaulter.A division bench of Justices Prathiba M. Singh and Rajneesh Kumar Gupta thus granted relief to the Petitioner-proprietorship firm and directed the Department...
No KVAT Levy On Advertisement Hoardings Where Right To Use Has Not Been Transferred: Kerala High Court
The Kerala High Court has held that transactions involving the display of advertisements on hoardings are not taxable under the Kerala Value Added Tax Act (KVAT), where the right to use has not been transferred. Justice Ziyad Rahman A.A. agreed with the assessee that the charges collected by the assessee for displaying the advertisement included the charges for erection, printing...
Merely Attaching Tax Determination Statement To DRC-01 Summary Cannot Be Treated As A Valid SCN: Gauhati High Court
The Gauhati High Court held that merely attaching tax determination statement to Drc-01 summary cannot be treated as a valid show cause notice. Justice Sanjay Kumar Medhi stated that “…….a formal and duly authenticated SCN is mandatorily required to initiate proceedings under Section 73. The Statement of tax determination under Section 73(3), which is attached to the summary...
Income Tax | S.194C & S.194LA Would Not Apply When TDR Certificates Are Issued In Lieu Of Compensation: Bombay High Court
The Bombay High Court held that Section 194C and Section 194LA of the Income Tax Act would not apply when TDR Certificates are issued in lieu of compensation. Justices B.P. Colabawalla and Firdosh P. Pooniwalla agreed with the assessee that the words “or by any other mode” appearing in Section 194C would have to be read ejusdem generis to the words “payment thereof in cash or...
Phrase 'Three Months' U/S 73(2) GST Act Means Three Calendar Months, Not 90 Days: Delhi High Court
The Delhi High Court has held that the 'three months' period prior to expiry of three years within which show cause notice for alleged wrongful availment of Input Tax Credit must be issued under Section 73 of the CGST Act, means three calendar months and not 90 days.Under Section 73, SCN is issued to an assessee for determination of tax not paid or short paid. The Proper Officer is required...
GST Refund Can't Be Granted To Trader Until Cancelled Registration Is Restored: Delhi High Court
The Delhi High Court has made it clear that GST refund cannot be granted to a trader whose GST registration stands cancelled.In the case at hand, the Petitioner's registration was cancelled in February 2023 with retrospective effect from July 2018.In this backdrop a division bench of Justices Prathiba M. Singh and Shail Jain observed,“When the GST registration itself has been cancelled in...
Let GST Council Look Into Tracking Of GST Paid On Foreign OIDAR Services : Supreme Court
The Supreme Court recently disposed of a public interest litigation seeking directions for setting up a mechanism to track services provided by foreign entities in India under the Goods and Services Tax (GST) regime. A bench of Justice BV Nagarathna and Justice KV Viswanathan passed the order after briefly hearing Advocate Charu Mathur, who appeared for the petitioner.During the hearing,...