Supreme Court Upholds Allahabad HC Decision That Chargers Sold With Cell Phones Cannot Be Taxed Separately Under UP VAT Act 2008

The Supreme Court recently upheld the decision of the Allahabad High Court which observed that the charger sold with a cell phone under the MRP cannot be taxed separately under the UP VAT Act 2008. The bench of Justice BV Nagarathna and Justice SC Sharma was hearing a challenge to the order of the Allahabad High Court which held that a mobile charger contained in a composite package with the...

Restaurant Service Or Bakery Product? Bombay High Court To Decide If Donuts & Cakes Should Be Taxed At 5% Or 18% Under GST

The Bombay High Court is to decide whether the donuts and cakes should be classified as restaurant service or a bakery product under Goods and Services Tax. The Division Bench of Justices B.P Colabawalla and Firdosh P. Pooniwalla were addressing the issue of whether the supply of donuts falls within the ambit of restaurant services under Service Accounting Code (SAC) 9963 or should...

Rajasthan GST Department Mandates Virtual Hearing In All Tax Matters, Issues Guidelines

The Rajasthan GST Department on 20.02.2025 issued guidelines on virtual hearing. The Guidelines have been issued in pursuance of the para 143 of the Budget Speech 2025-26 and in exercise of power conferred under Section 168 of the RGST Act, 2017. The circular highlights that in Rajasthan, provisions have also been made for faceless scrutiny as well as carrying out of Business...

Delhi High Court Allows Indigo Airlines' Plea, Holds Levy Of Additional IGST On Repaired & Re-Imported Aircraft Parts To Be Unconstitutional

In big relief to Indigo airlines, the Delhi High Court has held that an additional levy of Integrated Goods and Services Tax (IGST) and cess under Section 3(7) of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 on re-import of aircraft parts that were repaired abroad, is unconstitutional.A division bench of Justice Yashwant Varma and Ravinder Dudeja observed that “additional duty even after the transaction...

Service Tax Liability Can't Be Levied On Freight And Cartage Expenses Under GTA Services: CESTAT

The New Delhi Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has stated that service tax liability cannot be levied on freight and cartage expenses under GTA (Good Transport Agency) services. “The said amount/expenses/charges were not paid by the assessee directly to the transporter for transportation of any goods. Thus, the said activity cannot be...

Respondent Cannot File Cross-Objections To Appeal Before High Court U/S 260A Income Tax Act: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court has held that Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, which pertains to appeals to High Courts, does not envisage the filing of cross-objections by the opposite party, unlike Order XLI Rule 22 CPC.A division bench of Justices Yashwant Varma and Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar observed, “The Legislature appears to have consciously desisted from adopting principles akin...

Delhi High Court Expresses Concern Over Delay In Disposal Of Matters Before National Faceless Appeal Centre

The Delhi High Court has expressed grave concern over the pendency of over 5.4 Lakh appeals before the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC).The body was created for faceless assessment under Section 143 or 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, by the insertion of Section 144B via the Taxation and Other Laws (Relaxation and Amendment of Certain Provisions) Act, 2020.A division bench of Chief...

Rule 36(4) Of CGST Rules Is Constitutionally Valid, Does Not Derive Power From Section 43A: Gauhati High Court

The Gauhati High Court has upheld the constitutional validity of Rule 36(4) of the Central Goods and Services Tax/Assam Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017. The provision stipulates documentary requirements and conditions for a registered person claiming input tax credit (ITC).A division bench of Chief Justice Vijay Bishnoi and Justice N. Unni Krishnan Nair observed that the provision was...

Tax Weekly Round-Up: February 23 - March 02, 2025

SUPREME COURTGST Act | Can Time Limit To Adjudicate Show Cause Notice Be Extended By Notification Under S.168A? Supreme Court To ConsiderCase Name: M/S HCC-SEW-MEIL-AAG JV v. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAX & ORS. Case no.: Petition for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No.4240/2025The Supreme Court is to decide whether the time limit for adjudicating show cause notice and passing an order...

SCN & Orders Not Containing Signature Of Proper Officer Cannot Sustain Judicial Scrutiny: Telangana High Court

The Telangana High Court stated that the show cause notices and the orders which are not pregnant with the signature of the Proper Officer cannot sustain judicial scrutiny. The Division Bench of Acting Chief Justice Sujoy Paul and Justice Renuka Yara observed that “since Rule and prescribed Forms mandate requirement of signature of Proper Officer, its violation makes...

Tax Monthly Digest: February 2025

SUPREME COURTIncome Tax Act | Offence Committed Before Show-Cause Notice Compoundable As Covered By 'First Offence' In Compounding Guidelines: Supreme CourtCase title: VINUBHAI MOHANLAL DOBARIA Vs CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAXCase no.: SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) NO. 20519 OF 2024The Supreme Court on January 7 set aside the Gujarat High Court's judgment dated March 21, 2017, through which...

[CGST ACT] Dept Can't Seize Goods If Quantity Or Weight Of Goods Is Found Correct On Physical Verification: Calcutta High Court

The Calcutta High Court stated that GST department cannot seize the goods if the quantity or weight of the goods is found correct on physical verification. The Division Bench of Chief Justice T.S Sivagnanam and Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharyya noted that the quantity or the weight of the goods, which were carried in the vehicle, has been found to be correct by the department on...