Tax Weekly Round-Up: January 27 - February 02, 2025

Kapil Dhyani

3 Feb 2025 4:15 PM IST

  • Tax Weekly Round-Up: January 27 - February 02, 2025

    HIGH COURTSAndhra Pradesh HCS.12(10) Central Sale Tax (R&T) Rules | Can Certificate Of Export Be Filed After Completion Of Sales Tax Proceedings: AP HC Refers To Full BenchCase title: M/s. Mohan Spintex India Limited v. Commercial Tax Officer and OthersCase no.: WRIT PETITION NOs: 7158/2018,10587/2016, 2514/2020, 6480/2020, 6597/2020, 3111/2021, 40351/2022, 40354/2022, 23960/2023 &...

    HIGH COURTS

    Andhra Pradesh HC

    S.12(10) Central Sale Tax (R&T) Rules | Can Certificate Of Export Be Filed After Completion Of Sales Tax Proceedings: AP HC Refers To Full Bench

    Case title: M/s. Mohan Spintex India Limited v. Commercial Tax Officer and Others

    Case no.: WRIT PETITION NOs: 7158/2018,10587/2016, 2514/2020, 6480/2020, 6597/2020, 3111/2021, 40351/2022, 40354/2022, 23960/2023 & 29854 of 2024

    A Division Bench of the Andhra Pradesh High Court has placed a matter regarding the interpretation of Rule 12(10) of the Central Sale Tax (R&T) Rules before the Chief Justice for reference to a Full Bench.

    The question that arose before the coordinate bench was whether akin to Form C (Form of Declaration) and F (Form of declaration to be issued by the transferee); Form H (Certificate of Export that relieves from payment of VAT/CST) can also be filed after the sales tax assessment proceedings have been completed.

    Delhi HC

    Time Spent To Defend Reassessment Notice Issued Without Following Procedure Doesn't Extend Limitation For Revenue When Issuing Fresh Notice: Delhi HC

    Case title: Abhinav Jindal v. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax Circle 52

    Case no.: W.P.(C) 7405/2024

    The Delhi High Court has held that if the Revenue issues a reassessment notice to an assessee under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 without following due procedure, it cannot later issue fresh reassessment notice beyond the prescribed period, claiming that time spent on earlier litigation is to be excluded for the purposes of computing limitation.

    A division bench of Acting Chief Justice Vibhu Bakhru and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela observed, “Notice issued under Section 148 of the Act in the earlier round was set aside on the ground that the AO had not followed the mandatory requirement of seeking an approval from the competent authority…The fact that the Revenue had not taken the steps in accordance with law cannot possibly be construed as a factor in favour of the Revenue for extending the limitation.”

    Co-Owner Of Property Not Receiving Income From It Not Liable To Pay Tax On Income From Such Property: Delhi High Court

    Case title: Smt. Shivani Madan v. Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Delhi-01 & Anr.

    Case no.: ITA 573/2023

    The Delhi High Court has held that where a property is held jointly but only one co-owner reaps the benefit of income from such property, the other co-owner cannot be held liable to pay tax merely by virtue of co-ownership.

    A division bench of Justices Yashwant Varma and Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar observed, “the [Income Tax] Act fails to raise any presumption in law, of income necessarily arising or being liable to be assessed in the hands of an individual merely because it be a signatory to an instrument of conveyance. In our considered opinion, the question of taxability would necessarily have to be answered bearing in mind the individual who had in fact obtained benefits from the property.”

    Foreign Nationals Coming To India Not Required To Declare Personal Gold Jewellery To Customs: Delhi High Court

    Case title: Anjali Pandey v. Union Of India And Ors

    Case no.: W.P.(C) 10482/2024

    The Delhi High Court has held that foreign nationals coming to India need not declare to the Customs Department their gold jewellery which they are carrying for bonafide personal use.

    A division bench of Justices Prathiba M. Singh and Dharmesh Sharma further held that the Customs Department must make a distinction between 'jewellery' and 'personal jewellery', while seizing items for violation of the Baggage Rules, 2016 which are framed under the Customs Act, 1962.

    Kerala HC

    Money In Bank Account Is 'Property', Liable For Provisional Attachment U/S 281B Of Income Tax Act: Kerala High Court

    Case Title: Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Mohammed Salih

    Case Number: WA NO. 1413 OF 2024

    The Kerala High Court held that cash in bank account is a 'property' liable for provisional attachment under section 281B of the Income Tax Act.

    The Division Bench of Justices Sathish Ninan and Shoba Annamma Eapen observed that “mere fact that Bank account is not explicitly provided under Section 281B of the Income Tax Act, unlike the GST Act, 2017 which specifically mentions the same, cannot lead to the conclusion that Bank account is not liable to be attached under Section 281 B of the Act.”

    Madras HC

    GST Registration And Payment Of Tax After Inspection Is Not Voluntary Conduct: Madras High Court

    Case Title: M/s.Annai Angammal Arakkattalai v. The Joint Commissioner or GST (Appeals), Coimbatore

    Case Number: W.P.(MD)No.28502 of 2022

    The Madras High Court stated that GST registration and payment of tax after inspection is not a voluntary conduct.

    The Bench of Justice K. Kumaresh Babu observed that “there is a deliberate attempt to evade payment of tax by not registering himself under the Act and also issuing receipts as donation to the Trust. Only after the inspection they have agreed to pay the tax by registering themselves. This conduct cannot be said to be a voluntary conduct.”

    TRIBUNALS

    Department Cannot Invoke Extended Period Of Limitation Merely Because Returns Were Self-Assessed: CESTAT

    Case Title: M/s. Wellworth Project Developers Private Limited v. Commissioner of Commissioner of CGST

    Case Number: Service Tax Appeal No. 50259 of 2024

    The New Delhi Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has stated that the department cannot invoke the extended period of limitation merely because the returns were self-assessed.

    The Bench of Justice Dilip Gupta (President) and P. V. Subba Rao (Technical Member) has observed that “Mere suppression of facts is not enough to invoke the extended period of limitation contemplated under the proviso to section 73(1) of the Finance Act. The suppression has to be with an intent to evade payment of service tax and for this purpose the show cause notice must specifically allege why the asseessee has suppressed facts with intent to evade payment of service tax.”

    Prescribed Time Limit For Filing Refund Application Cannot Be Disregarded Merely Because Tax Was Collected Without Legal Authority: CESTAT

    Case Title: Deepak Pandey v. Commissioner of Service Tax

    Case Number: Service Appeal No. 52346 of 2018

    The New Delhi Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has stated that the prescribed time limit for filing a refund application cannot be disregarded merely because the tax was collected without legal authority.

    The Bench of Justices Dilip Gupta (President) and P. V. Subba Rao (Technical) has observed that “the appellant cannot be permitted to claim a refund of service tax under sub-section (1) of section 102 and at the same time contend that the condition stipulated in sub-section (3) of section 102 of the Finance Act should be ignored.”

    BUDGET STORIES

    'Full Tax Rebate For Income Up To Rs 12 Lakhs' : Finance Minister Announces New Tax Rates In Union Budget 2025

    Union Finance Minister Nirmala Sitaraman in her budget speech announced proposals which effectively mean that there is no income tax payable for normal salaried income up to Rs 12 lakhs per annum.

    She said that for taxpayers up to Rs12 lakhs of normal income, other than special rate incomes such as capital gains, tax rebate is being provided in such a manner that there is no tax payable by them.

    New Income Tax Bill Will Be Introduced Next Week : Finance Minister

    Union Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman announced in her budget speech on Saturday that a new income tax bill will be introduced next week.

    She said that the new tax bill will be simpler and clearer compared to the present Income Tax Act 1967.

    No TCS On Sale Of Goods; Changes To TDS/TCS Regime : Union Budget 2025 Proposals

    With an aim to rationalise Deducted at Source (TDS) and Tax Collected at Source(TCS), the following measures have been introduced: "I propose to rationalise tax deduction at source by reducing the number of rates and thresholds above which TDS is deduced. Further, the threshold amount for tax deduction will be increased for better clarity and uniformity. The limit for a tax deduction on interest for senior citizens is being doubled from the present Rs.50,000 to 1 lac. Similarly, the annual limit of 2.40 lac rupees for TDS on rent has been increased to 6 lac rupees. This will reduce the number of transactions liable to TDS. Thus, benefitting small taxpayers receiving small pay."

    Welfare Measures For Gig Workers, Jan Viswhwas Bill 2.0 : Union Budget 2025 Proposals

    Government has decided to provide welfare security for gig workers in India. As per Sitharaman's budget speech, under the Social Security Scheme for the welfare of online platform workers, they will be provided with an identity card and registration at the e-Shram portal of the Ministry of Labour & Employment. The gig workers will also be provided with health care insurance under the Pradhan Mantri Jan Arogya Yojana.

    Next Story