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.
Statutory Scope
DGFT notifies procedure for General Authorization for Export of Telecommunication Items: Public Notice
FOREIGN TRADE POLICY ?|? CIRCULARS & NOTIFICATIONS
The DGFT has issue public notice to prescribe procedure for General Authorization for Export of Telecommunication Items (GAET) under category 8A5 part 1 of SCOMET.
Key Details:
Statute Number: PUBLIC NOTICE NO. 52/2023
Date of Statute: 27-03-2024
Notification of procedure for General Authorization for Export of Information Security Items: Public Notice
FOREIGN TRADE POLICY ?|? CIRCULARS & NOTIFICATIONS
The DGFT has issue public notice to notify procedure for General Authorization for Export of Information Security Items under Category 8A5 Part 2 of SCOMET.
Key Details: Statute Number: PUBLIC NOTICE NO. 53/2023
Date of Statute: 27-03-2024
HC directed revenue to lift garnishee order as no further proceedings were required against DRC-01A issued to assessee
GST ?|? CASE LAW
GST: Where assessee demonstrated that Revenue had found his submission satisfactory, and no further proceedings were required against disputed form, but garnishee order and bank account attachment remained in place, Revenue authority was directed to lift such orders applying principle of precedent set forth in relevant case law.
Key Details:
Case Name: Bivas De vs. State of West Bengal
Citation: (2024) 16 Centax 440 (Cal.)
No ruling to be pronounced on classification of product ‘JAC Olivol Body Oil’ since there were divergence in views of members: AAAR
GST ?|? CASE LAW
GST: Where there is difference of opinion between members of Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling on issue of classification of product 'JAC Olivol Body Oil', therefore, no advance ruling can be deemed to be pronounced as per Section 101.
Key Details:
Case Name: In Re: Indranil Chatterjee
Citation: (2024) 16 Centax 441 (App. A.A.R. - GST - W.B.)
HC grants bail to person accused of evading huge amount of GST as offence was compoundable in nature
GST ?|? CASE LAW
GST: Where bail application was filed for offence registered under section 132(1)(c)(f) read with section 132(5) of CGST Act, matter was triable by magistrate, applicant had no criminal antecedents, charge-sheet was filed, offence compoundable in nature, co-accused enlarged on bail, bail application was to be allowed.
Key Details:
Case Name: Sandeep Singhal vs. Directorate General Of Central Goods & Services Tax Intelligence
Citation: (2024) 16 Centax 443 (Raj.)
Kerala HC set-aside order passed by GST officer as no time was granted to assessee to file reply to SCN
GST ?|? CASE LAW
GST: Where GST ASMT-10 was issued to assessee and on very next day a show cause notice was issued under section 73, since assessee was not afforded any time for filing reply to ASMT-10, it was violation of principles of natural justice and, therefore, impugned assessment order was set aside and matter was remanded.
Key Details:
Case Name: Vadakkoot Chackoo Devassy vs. Assistant State Tax Officer
Citation: (2024) 16 Centax 445 (Ker.)
Physically challenged person can’t be summoned for interrogation on day-to-day basis: Telangana HC
GST ?|? CASE LAW
GST: Where physically challenged accountant challenged frequent summons in GST investigation, High court upheld necessity of summons but reduced frequency for interrogation due to his limitations, requiring full cooperation throughout.
Key Details:
Case Name: Vemula Yougander vs. Union of India
Citation: (2024) 16 Centax 446 (Telangana)
Revocation of Custom Broker’s license with forfeiture of security deposit is justified for filing Benami Bill of Entries: CESTAT
CUSTOMS ?|? CASE LAW
Customs: Where Customs Broker received authorization to clear consignment from mastermind of operation, and not from importer firm on paper whose credentials were not verified, and Customs Broker had neither contacted nor advised importer on paper to comply with Customs Act, 1962 and allied Acts, Regulations 10(a), 10(d), and 10(n) of Customs Broker Licensing Regulations, 2018 were violated.
Key Details:
Case Name: Ananya Exim vs. Commissioner of Customs (Airport & General)
Citation: (2024) 16 Centax 426 (Tri.-Del)
Order passed without verifying Bank Realisation Certificate of petitioner available in web portal of DGFT to be set aside: HC
CUSTOMS ?|? CASE LAW
Customs: Assistant Commissioner, without verifying Bank Realisation Certificate of petitioner available in web portal of Directorate General of Foreign Trade, passed impugned order directing petitioner to repay duty drawback amount sanctioned to it; Hence, impugned order is set aside and matter is remanded.
Key Details:
Case Name: Fashions Knit Garments vs. Assistant Commissioner of Customs
Citation: (2024) 16 Centax 427 (Mad.)
HC remanded matter as no cross-examination was allowed to assessee who specifically sought for it by giving list of persons
CUSTOMS ?|? CASE LAW
Customs: When element of criminality is alleged on petitioner, then petitioner is entitled to personal hearing along with cross examination; When petitioner specifically sought for cross examination by giving list of persons, denying opportunity of cross examination is clear violation of principles of natural justice.
Key Details:
Case Name: Gaunir Impex Pvt. Ltd. vs. Union of India
Citation: (2024) 16 Centax 429 (Mad.)
Differential Pressure Sensors to reduce emissions in diesel vehicles are classifiable under Tariff Item 9026 20 00: AAR
CUSTOMS ?|? CASE LAW
Customs: Differential Pressure Sensors to reduce emissions in diesel vehicles, measuring difference in pressure between inward and outward flow of exhaust gases into Diesel Particulate Filter of vehicle, are classifiable under Tariff Item 9026 20 00 as they use electrical phenomena to measure pressure; they are excluded from Section XVII and from Heading 8708, even though principally and solely used in vehicles.
Key Details:
Case Name: In re: Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd.
Citation: (2024) 16 Centax 431 (A.A.R. - Cus. - Mum.)
Apatite Calcium Phosphate for which test report found it “natural” and not “synthetic” is classifiable under Heading 2510: CESTAT
CUSTOMS ?|? CASE LAW
Customs: Apatite (Ground) Calcium Phosphate/Natural Calcium Phosphate, for which test report found it to be “natural” and not “synthetic”, moist in nature and not hygroscopic, and Loss on Ignition (LOI) was less than 1%, was classifiable under Heading 2510 and not under Heading 2835.
Key Details:
Case Name: Mudrika Ceramics I. Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Customs
Citation: (2024) 16 Centax 432 (Tri.-Ahmd)
Roasted Areca/Betel Nuts roasted using ovens beyond 150 degrees celsius are classifiable under Tariff Item 2008 19 20: AAR
CUSTOMS ?|? CASE LAW
Customs: Roasted Areca/Betel Nuts (whole or cut), roasted using ovens beyond 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: Shree Ganesh Traders
Citation: (2024) 16 Centax 436 (A.A.R. - Cus. - Mum.)
Amendment of shipping bill can’t be denied if it was due to mistake of Custom House Agent: CESTAT
CUSTOMS ?|? CASE LAW
Customs: Amendment of shipping Bill cannot be denied when benefit of DFIA scheme and VKGUY scheme claimed by exporter at the time of export only in shipping bills as well as in invoices but Shipping Bill cleared as ‘no export incentive’ due to oversight and mistake on part of Custom House Agent.
Key Details:
Case Name: Saurabh Overseas Traders vs. Commissioner of Customs
Citation: (2024) 16 Centax 434 (Tri.-Bang)
AO can’t decide on reassessment without considering that amount received as escalation charges would not be exigible under VAT: HC
EXCISE & SERVICE TAX ?|? CASE LAW
VAT: Where impugned order for re-assessment was passed and assessee did not participated in re-assessment proceedings, since assessing officer could not have decided on reassessment without considering assessee’s case that amount received as escalation charges would not be exigible under VAT Act, accordingly, impugned order was set aside and proceeding was restored to assessing officer.
Key Details:
Case Name: Yojaka (India) Pvt. Ltd. vs. State of Karnataka
Citation: (2024) 16 Centax 447 (Kar.)
No penalty shall be levied if service tax along with interest was paid by assessee before SCN: CESTAT
EXCISE & SERVICE TAX ?|? CASE LAW
ST: Where entire service tax along with interest has been paid before issue of Show cause notice, show cause notice is not required to be issued; further extended period of limitation is not invokable in absence of any evidence as to fraud etc.
Key Details:
Case Name: Gannon Dunkerley and Company Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Service Tax
Citation: (2024) 16 Centax 428 (Tri.-Cal)
No demand of reversal of Cenvat credit at manufacturing unit level if excess credit was already reversed at ISD level: CESTAT
EXCISE & SERVICE TAX ?|? CASE LAW
Excise/Cenvat: Total Cenvat Credit" for purpose of formula under Rule 6(3A) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 is only total Cenvat credit of common input services and not Cenvat credit on input/input service exclusively used for manufacture of dutiable goods; Government had no intention to deny Cenvat credit on input/input service even though used in dutiable goods.
Key Details:
Case Name: L.G. Electronics India Pvt. Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Central Excise
Citation: (2024) 16 Centax 430 (Tri.-Bom)
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 Essentials on GST & Customs Law as Amended by the Finance Act 2024
Buy Now with FREE 'Express' Delivery! https://centax.one/cwo9m