Centaxonline’s Tax Gazette
Dear Reader,
Welcome to Centaxonline's Tax Gazette – Where Complexity Meets Clarity.
Today, we draw the definitive line between being informed and uninformed, empowering you with the latest and most essential tax insights.
Case Chronicles
HC remanded matter as GST authority passed non-speaking order without considering submissions made by assessee
GST ?|? CASE LAW
GST: Where assessee filed reply to show cause notice, however impugned order was passed confirming demand stating that assessee had not filed reply, same was in violation of principles of natural justice, therefore, impugned order was to be set aside.
Key Details:
Case Name: Sri Murugan Traders vs. Commercial Tax Officer
Citation: (2024) 22 Centax 499 (Mad.)
HC quashed order as SCN didn’t mention date, time and venue of personal hearing
GST ?|? CASE LAW
GST: Where date, time and venue of personal hearing were not provided in show cause notice, assessment order was to be redone after affording reasonable opportunity of hearing.
Key Details:
Case Name: Shasthiri Senthamarai Kannan vs. Deputy Commercial Tax Officer (ST)
Citation: (2024) 22 Centax 485 (Mad.)
HC remanded matter as order was passed on discrepancies between GSTR-1 and GSTR-3B without hearing assessee
GST ?|? CASE LAW
GST: Where assessee did not file reply to notice issued by Authority for alleged discrepancies and excess availment of ITC, as assessee was under impression that its consultant must have filed suitable reply, since impugned order confirming demand was passed without hearing assessee, same was to be set aside for being in violation of natural justice.
Key Details:
Case Name: Tvl. Balaji Trading Company vs. Assistant Commissioner (ST)
Citation: (2024) 22 Centax 500 (Mad.)
Section 129(1)(b) could not be invoked if consignor himself claimed to be owner of goods: HC
GST ?|? CASE LAW
GST: Where goods were accompanied with documents i.e., tax invoice, GR and E-way bill and state failed to bring on record any material to show that goods were purchased from non-bonafide dealer, proceedings under section 129 could not be initiated.
Key Details:
Case Name: Samira Enterprises vs. State of U.P.
Citation: (2024) 22 Centax 484 (All.)
"Non-woven coated fabrics-coated, laminated or impregnated with PVC" would fall under Chapter 39: AAR
GST ?|? CASE LAW
GST: Goods of applicant-assessee namely "non-woven coated fabrics-coated, laminated or impregnated with PVC" would fall under chapter 39;Products namely [a] table cover, [b] television cover [c]washing machine cover would fall within ambit of tariff item 392690 and would attract 18% GST, while, bags would be classified under tariff item 3923 and would attract 18% GST.
Key Details:
Case Name: In Re : Om Vinyls Pvt. Ltd.
Citation: (2024) 22 Centax 504 (A.A.R. - GST - Guj.)
HC remanded matter as AO denied ITC without providing opportunity to assessee to substantiate its claim
GST ?|? CASE LAW
GST: Where a notice was issued to assessee alleging certain discrepancies in respect of claim of ITC in GSTR-3B and GSTR-2A returns and assessee had filed response to same along with certain documents, however impugned order was passed without giving any further opportunity to assessee to substantiate its claim, impugned order was to be set aside and matter was to be remanded.
Key Details:
Case Name: Noor Jewel Impex vs. Assistant Commissioner (ST)
Citation: (2024) 22 Centax 501 (Mad.)
HC grants bail to director of firm allegedly involved in GST evasion since trial had not yet commenced
GST ?|? CASE LAW
GST: Where applicant was arrested for offence of GST evasion and was in jail for about 3 months, since trial in instant case had not yet commenced and there was nothing to demonstrate that application, if enlarged on bail, could in any way adversely affect trial, applicant was to be released on bail.
Key Details:
Case Name: Navin Jain vs. Union of India
Citation: (2024) 22 Centax 502 (All.)
HC remanded matter to pass fresh order to allow ITC as delay in filing of claiming ITC is regularized by Finance Act, 2024
GST ?|? CASE LAW
GST: Where assessees registration was cancelled and thereafter restored, due to which, assessee filed belated returns and impugned order was passed confirming demand, same was to be set aside in view of finance bill 2024, which proposed to regularize delay in filing ITC.
Key Details:
Case Name: Tvl. Muthu Rathina Indane Gas Agencies vs. Joint Commissioner (ST) (Intelligence)
Citation: (2024) 22 Centax 503 (Mad.)
HC quashes SCN issued as extended period for passing order was not covered by force majeure
GST ?|? CASE LAW
GST: Notification No. 56/2023-CT, dated 28-12-2023 extending period for passing of order under section 73(10) of Central Act issued without any recommendation of GST Council is ultra vires Central Act and same is not legally sustainable in law.
Key Details:
Case Name: Barkataki Print and Media Services vs. Union of India
Citation: (2024) 22 Centax 479 (Gau.)
HC dismissed writ as assessee didn't respond to SCN alleging ITC was claimed from non-existent Co.
GST ?|? CASE LAW
GST: Where show cause notice was issued alleging that supplier from whom petitioner had claimed input tax credit was non-existent and engaged in bill trading activities, petitioner should respond to said notice and if still aggrieved, seek judicial review; writ petition filed without responding to show cause notice was not maintainable.
Key Details:
Case Name: Sumathi Enterprises vs. Assistant Commissioner (ST)
Citation: (2024) 22 Centax 486 (Mad.)
Contempt petition is not maintainable if GST authority had complied with court’s direction: HC
GST ?|? CASE LAW
GST: Where High Court had directed GST authorities to consider application for cancellation of GST registration in expeditious manner and GST authorities had taken decision on said application, contempt petition filed for alleged wilful disobedience of said direction was not maintainable.
Key Details:
Case Name: Shri Vaishnavi Iternational vs. Chanchal Yadav
Citation: (2024) 22 Centax 487 (Del.)
No GST on mere holding of shares by parent company in subsidiary can’t be treated as supply of service: HC
GST ?|? CASE LAW
GST: Shareholding by parent company not taxable as supply of service under GST; taxability of external commercial borrowings to be reconsidered after giving opportunity to assessee
Key Details:
Case Name: A.O. Smith India Water Products Pvt. Ltd. vs. State of Karnataka
Citation: (2024) 22 Centax 506 (Kar.)
HC set aside ex-parte order which was passed without granting hearing opportunity to assessee
GST ?|? CASE LAW
GST: Ex parte order under GST Act quashed; authority directed to grant hearing and pass reasoned order within timeframe.
Key Details:
Case Name: Aadi Shakti Ent Udyog vs. Goods and Service Tax Council
Citation: (2024) 22 Centax 507 (All.)
Contempt petition to be dismissed as withdrawn since GST registration was cancelled as per direction of Delhi HC
GST ?|? CASE LAW
GST: Where petitioner was seeking initiation of contempt proceedings against respondent authority for wilful disobedience of directions of court in W.P.(C) No. 10636/2024, dated 2-8-2024, however, submitted that direction of court had since been complied and GST registration had been cancelled, instant contempt petition was to be dismissed as withdrawn.
Key Details:
Case Name: AG Traders vs. Chanchal Yadav, Principal Commissioner of Department of Trade and Taxes
Citation: (2024) 22 Centax 508 (Del.)
HC remanded matter to GST authority to pass fresh order in light of new Section 128A of CGST Act
GST ?|? CASE LAW
GST: Where assessee paid tax liability as per impugned orders, matter remanded for reconsideration in light of new Section 128A of CGST Act providing for deemed conclusion of proceedings.
Key Details:
Case Name: Saptarshi vs. Deputy Commissioner of State Tax, Bureau of Investigation
Citation: (2024) 22 Centax 511 (Cal.)
HC remanded matter for fresh consideration as no opportunity of personal hearing was given before passing order
GST ?|? CASE LAW
GST: Impugned order under Section 73 of CGST Act set aside due to lack of personal hearing opportunity; matter remanded for fresh consideration after allowing assessee to file reply and be heard, subject to payment of 10% of disputed amount.
Key Details:
Case Name: Seshammaljain Sanjay Kumar vs. Assistant Commissioner (ST)
Citation: (2024) 22 Centax 512 (Mad.)
HC quashes order rejecting refund application on ground that application was not within time prescribed under Section 34(2)
GST ?|? CASE LAW
GST: Where refund application had been rejected by respondent no.4-department without giving personal hearing to petitioner-assessee and respondent no.4-department had rejected refund application on basis of it being not within time prescribed under Sub Section (2) of Section 34, although, it had been recorded that petitioner-assessee’s application had been filed under Section 54; therefore, order rejecting refund application passed by respondent no.4-department and appellate order passed by
Key Details:
Case Name: Siemens Ltd. vs. Joint Commissioner of State Tax
Citation: (2024) 22 Centax 513 (Bom.)
HC disposed of petition by directing assessee to avail statutory remedy of appeal under Section 107
GST ?|? CASE LAW
GST: Where assessee had challenged order, issued in Form GST DRC-07 by revenue whereby, assessee was directed to pay Rs. 42,58,557 under Section 73, along with interest and penalty on alleged ground that Input Tax Credit had been availed in contravention of Section 16(2)(c), instant writ petition was to be disposed of directing assessee to avail statutory remedy of appeal under Section 107.
Key Details:
Case Name: Sursarita Vanijya Pvt. Ltd. vs. Principal Commissioner of Central Goods and Services Tax
Citation: (2024) 22 Centax 514 (Jhar.)
Roasted Areca/Betel Nuts (whole or cut) roasted using ovens would fall under CTH 2008 19 20: AAR
CUSTOMS ?|? CASE LAW
CUSTOMS: Roasted Areca/Betel Nuts (whole or cut), roasted using ovens in range of 150 degrees celsius then cooled in room temperature and cycle repeated until moisture content is less than 6%, are classifiable under Tariff Item 2008 19 20 and not under Heading 0802.
Key Details:
Case Name: In re : DI PEC Exim LLP
Citation: (2024) 22 Centax 492 (A.A.R. - Cus. - Del.)
Commission paid to Govt. for providing guarantee in raising funds from debt market is taxable under RCM: CESTAT
EXCISE & SERVICE TAX ?|? CASE LAW
ST: Guarantee commission paid to state government for providing guarantee to raise funds constitutes “support service” liable to service tax under reverse charge mechanism. Extended period of limitation and penalties set aside for lack of evidence of intentional evasion.
Key Details:
Case Name: Krishna Bhagya Jala Nigam Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Central Tax, Bangalore North
Citation: (2024) 22 Centax 496 (Tri.-Bang)
No interest & penalty could be imposed on retrospective levy of service tax: CESTAT
EXCISE & SERVICE TAX ?|? CASE LAW
ST: Retrospective service tax liability created by legislative amendment cannot attract interest and penalties, as these are quasi-punitive in nature.
Key Details:
Case Name: Commissioner, Namakkal Municipality vs. Commissioner of Gst & Central Excise, Salem
Citation: (2024) 22 Centax 490 (Tri.-Mad)
SC dismissed appeal against ruling that no ST on activation of feature related software due to low tax effect
EXCISE & SERVICE TAX ?|? CASE LAW
ST: Business Auxiliary Service - Activation of feature related software while selling EPBAX to customers on payment of VAT/CST whether liable to service tax under BAS? Apex Court dismisses Revenue’s appeal on low tax effect.
Key Details:
Case Name: Commissioner of Central Excise and ST, Ahmedabad-III vs. Black Box Ltd.
Citation: (2024) 22 Centax 488 (S.C.)
SC dismissed appeal on ground of low tax effect as being covered by Circular issued by CBIC keeping question of law open
EXCISE & SERVICE TAX ?|? CASE LAW
ST: Educational services, all kinds without any restrictions, provided by educational institutions to its students whether exempted from service tax? Apex Court dismisses Revenue’s appeal on low tax effect, keeping question of law open, against CESTAT order holding that such exemption was available.
Key Details:
Case Name: Commissioner of CGST and Central Excise, Aurangabad vs. Shiv Chhatrapati Shikshan Sanstha
Citation: (2024) 22 Centax 498 (S.C.)
Exemption under Notification No. 17/2004-ST was available for service tax paid under Section 66A on imported IPR services: CESTAT
EXCISE & SERVICE TAX ?|? CASE LAW
ST: Exemption under Notification No. 17/2004-ST is available for service tax paid under Section 66A on imported IPR services, and TDS paid by assessee from own account cannot be included in taxable value of imported services.
Key Details:
Case Name: FCI OEN Connectors Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Central Tax, Cochin
Citation: (2024) 22 Centax 497 (Tri.-Bang)
Legal Beacon
New Functionality – Invoice Management System To Enhance ITC Ecosystem of GST
GST ?|? OPINION ?|? (2024) 22 Centax 516 (Article)
A new functionality of Invoice Management System (IMS) is developed by the GSTN. The recipient’s inward invoices would be appeared on the common portal to enable the taxpayer to streamline the supplier’s invoices auto-populated in IMS dashboard. The functionality allows the recipient to accept / reject / hold invoices appear in IMS. The IMS also facilitate taxpayer in matching of their records / invoices vis-à-vis issued by their suppliers for availing the correct Input Tax Credit (ITC).
Author
Ramesh Chandra Jena
B.A. (Hons.), M.A. (Eco.), D.M.M., LL.B. Advocate & Tax Consultant
Constitution Bench Judgment on Taxation of Mineral Royalties: A 7-Decade Old Controversy Comes To A Resolution
GST ?|? OPINION ?|? (2024) 22 Centax 517 (Article)
Mineral resources are a shared inheritance of the people, and because of this, it has always been imperative for the state to ensure its equitable distribution to subserve the common good. Ending the long-brewing controversy, a recent nine-bench judge has put an end to the question of whether State Governments are empowered to tax mineral rights and mineral-bearing lands.
Author
Lopamudra Mahapatra
Advocate
As we conclude this issue of Tax Gazette, we hope you've gained clarity and insights on the critical legal and tax matters that shape our world. Remember, with Centaxonline. You're not just informed. You're insightfully empowered.
The Renowned ??????-?????????? is now '????????????’!
Introducing ????????????????????????.??????.
It combines our Editorial legacy of ???? ?????????? and our Research legacy of ???? ?????????? with the latest technology.
Offering reliance and expertise as consistently as ever.
Experience a century’s expertise of tax laws with a 7-day FREE TRIAL: https://centax.one/I5Fj
????????????????
? ???????????????????? ????????????
? ????-?????????? ???????????? ???????????? ???????????????? ???? ??.??. ????????’?? ?????? ??????????
? ????????-???????? ?????????????????? ???? ???????? ????????, ????????????????, ??????.
? ??.???? ???????? ???????? ???????? ???????? ?????? 1940?? ???????? ??????????????????
? ???????????? ?????????????? ????????, ??????????, ?????????????????? & ??????????????????????????, ?????? & ?????????????? ????????????
? ?????? ???????????????????????? ?????????? ?????? ??????, ??????????????, ???????????? & ??????????????-??????