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
Writ dismissed as disputed questions of fact require adjudication by statutory authorities
GST ?|? CASE LAW
GST: Wrongful invocation of extended period under Section 74 and incorrect factual findings in GST demand order to be agitated before statutory authorities, not in writ jurisdiction.
Key Details:
Case Name: Ayyappan Pillai vs. State Tax Officer
Citation: (2024) 24 Centax 332 (Ker.)
No refund of unutilized ITC if output service exempt from tax: HC
GST ?|? CASE LAW
GST: Where assessee was providing exempted education services but, at same time, assessee uses various taxable inputs, capital goods and input services and GST on such inputs, capital goods and input services is borne by assessee which adds to cost to assessee, since assessees services were fully exempt, claim of assessee to grant refund of ITC on output service exempt from tax could not be acceptedas per section 54(3)(ii), instant writ petition was to be dismissed.
Key Details:
Case Name: Empire Foundation vs. Union of India
Citation: (2024) 24 Centax 334 (Guj.)
Delay in revocation application condoned subject to payment of tax, interest, penalty, late fee etc
GST ?|? CASE LAW
GST: Where registration of assessee was cancelled and assessee filed instant petition, in view of order passed in Mohanty Enterprises v. Commissioner CT GST [W.P.(C) No.30374 of 2022, dated 16-11-2022, delay in invoking provision to rule 23 was to be condoned and subject to assessee depositing all taxes, interest and penalty, assessee’s application was to be considered.
Key Details:
Case Name: Md. Naimuddin vs. Additional Commissioner
Citation: (2024) 24 Centax 336 (Ori.)
No interest shall be levied if underlying tax liability was adjudicated in favour of assessee
GST ?|? CASE LAW
GST: Since assessee’s underlying tax liability for 2006-2008 had been nullified in prior proceedings, there was absolutely no basis for rejecting assessee’s application for waiver of interest, instant writ petition was to be disposed of.
Key Details:
Case Name: Pepsico India Holdings Pvt. Ltd. vs. Commissioner Commercial Tax
Citation: (2024) 24 Centax 337 (Raj.)
Letter directing assessee to pay pre-deposit through Electronic Cash Ledger instead of ITC Ledger to be quashed
GST ?|? CASE LAW
GST: Amount paid by Assessee as pre-deposit in compliance of section 107(6)(b) utilizing amount of Electronic Credit Ledger was required to be considered valid and letter issued by revenue directing assessee to pay pre-deposit amount through Electronic Cash Ledger was to be quashed and set aside and appeal filed by assessee against order of recovery of demand and penalty was to be heard on merits.
Key Details:
Case Name: Yasho Industries Ltd. vs. Union of India
Citation: (2024) 24 Centax 338 (Guj.)
Order to be set aside as ECL was blocked without granting a pre-decisional hearing: HC
GST ?|? CASE LAW
GST: Where no pre-decisional hearing was provided/granted by respondent-authorities before blocking Electronic Credit Ledger and there was no independent or cogent reason to believe except reports of Enforcement authority, impugned blocking order was impermissible in law as same was based on borrowed satisfaction.
Key Details:
Case Name: Travacore Minerals and Transport Company vs. State of Karnataka
Citation: (2024) 24 Centax 94 (Kar.)
Liberty was granted to assessee to file an appeal since order was passed without providing a personal hearing: HC
GST ?|? CASE LAW
GST: Lack of notice and opportunity of personal hearing due to unawareness of notices uploaded in GST portal after registration cancellation - Appeal permitted within 30 days without limitation bar.
Key Details:
Case Name: Micra Leathers vs. Commercial Tax Officer
Citation: (2024) 24 Centax 93 (Mad.)
Penalty for detention of goods in transit was set aside as it was contrary to the CBIC's clarification: HC
GST ?|? CASE LAW
GST: Section 129(1)(b) penalty imposition contrary to CBIC clarification prescribing Section 129(1)(a) penalty warrants reconsideration under correct provision.
Key Details:
Case Name: Madhav Trader vs. State of U.P.
Citation: (2024) 24 Centax 150 (All.)
HC stayed SCN for lack of jurisdiction as no specific allegations of fraud or wilful misstatement to evade tax were made
GST ?|? CASE LAW
GST: Show cause notice issued by revenue against assessee in relation to GST tax payable under Section 74 "on printing services" was to be stayed as said notice was without jurisdiction as there was no specific allegation with regard to wrongful availment or short payment of tax "by reason of fraud, or any wilful misstatement or suppression of facts to evade tax, which is a required condition for invoking Section 74.
Key Details:
Case Name: Pitambra Books Pvt. Ltd. vs. Union of India
Citation: (2024) 24 Centax 154 (All.)
Writ dismissed as assessee failed to appeal against order within limitation as directed by Co-ordinate Bench: HC
GST ?|? CASE LAW
GST: Where in petition filed by assessee against order under 142 of CGST Rules on ground that determination of tax made without service of order passed under section 74 of CGST Act, on earlier occasion, writ court granted specific relief extending limitation time to file appeal, which assessee did not avail, writ petition impugning same order again on ground of validity was to be dismissed.
Key Details:
Case Name: Radhey Traders vs. State of UP
Citation: (2024) 24 Centax 156 (All.)
HC set aside order as SCN for cancellation of registration was issued in GST REG-31 instead of Form GST REG-17
GST ?|? CASE LAW
GST: Where proceedings were initiated for cancellation of registration by issuing show cause notice in Form GST REG-31 instead of in Form GST REG-17 as required under CGST Rules, impugned orders cancelling registration were to be set aside.
Key Details:
Case Name: Riosis Pvt. Ltd. vs. Superintendent
Citation: (2024) 24 Centax 157 (Ker.)
Authorities cannot dismiss the appeal without allowing the assessee to prove that the signatory was authorized: HC
GST ?|? CASE LAW
GST: Where assessee’s appeal was dismissed by appellate authority on ground that authorised signatory of assessee did not sign appeal and board resolution was not produced, proper material produced by assessee to show that signatory on appeal memo authorised to sign same, impugned order was to be set aside.
Key Details:
Case Name: SBI General Insurance Company Ltd. vs. Union of India
Citation: (2024) 24 Centax 158 (Bom.)
No goods shall be detained on the ground of undervaluation if the goods are accompanied by all relevant documents: HC
GST ?|? CASE LAW
GST: Where goods were accompanied with all relevant documents including e-way bill, GR and tax invoice etc. and there was no difference in HSN Code and quantity as well as tax leviable on goods in question, detention of same on grounds of under valuation was not justified.
Key Details:
Case Name: A.N. Enterprises vs. Additional Commissioner
Citation: (2024) 24 Centax 347 (All.)
Assessee is directed to pursue alternate remedy before Appellate Authority & payment made to be considered as pre-deposit
GST ?|? CASE LAW
GST: Assessee relegated to avail alternate remedy of preferring an appeal before appellate authority with direction to make payment before adjudicating authority which shall be treated as requisite pre-deposit for entertaining appeal by appellate authority.
Key Details:
Case Name: Ravi Taparia vs. Union of India
Citation: (2024) 23 Centax 444 (Cal.)
Notice issued to GSTN for not providing the option to file an appeal against the rejection of TRAN-1: HC
GST ?|? CASE LAW
GST: Where petitioners Form GST TRAN-1 claiming transitional credit was rejected on ground that transaction credit of Central Excise Duty was filled in wrong Column and further petitioner could not file appeal on there was no option on GST portal, notice was to be issued to respondents.
Key Details:
Case Name: Anil Kumar Singh vs. Union of India
Citation: (2024) 24 Centax 348 (All.)
Construction services provided to private educational institutions are exempt from service tax
CUSTOMS ?|? CASE LAW
ST: Where assessee provided construction services to private educational institutions, Tribunal set aside demand of service tax, holding that such services were exempt as per Board Circular clarifying that constructions for educational purposes are non-commercial in nature and not taxable.
Key Details:
Case Name: URC Constructions Pvt. Ltd. vs. Commissioner of CGST & Central Excise, Salem
Citation: (2024) 24 Centax 379 (Tri.-Mad)
State has obligation to refund monies paid under mistaken belief of duty liability; Customs was directed to pay interest
CUSTOMS ?|? CASE LAW
Customs: Payment under mistaken belief of duty liability was not outside ken of Section 27A of Customs Act, 1962 for grant of interest on delayed refund; State has positive obligation to refund monies paid under mistake or absent liability lawfully imposed, and contrary position breach constitutional ethos under Article 265 of Constitution, 1950.
Key Details:
Case Name: Telecare Network (India) Pvt. Ltd. vs. Union Of India
Citation: (2024) 24 Centax 398 (Del.)
Income from bowling alley not leviable to Service Tax under Sec. 66D(j) of Finance Act 1994
EXCISE & SERVICE TAX ?|? CASE LAW
ST: Bowling alley income was covered under Negative List of services under Section 66D(j) of Finance Act, 1994 and it was not leviable to Service Tax even if assessee had also provided other independent services such as video/fun games, restaurant facilities, sale of socks and supply of shoes in same common premises with a single entry and had not charged any separate entry/admission fee for entering in said premises.
Key Details:
Case Name: Smaaash Leisure Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Central Goods & Service Tax, New Delhi
Citation: (2024) 24 Centax 399 (Tri.-Del)
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?? ???????? ??????????????????
? ???????????? ?????????????? ????????, ??????????, ?????????????????? & ??????????????????????????, ?????? & ?????????????? ????????????
? ?????? ???????????????????????? ?????????? ?????? ??????, ??????????????, ???????????? & ??????????????-??????