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 assessee was unaware of proceedings due to cancellation of its GST registration
GST ?|? CASE LAW
GST: Where registration of assessee was cancelled and proceedings were initiated thereafter, whereas, all notices and orders were uploaded on portal and not physically handed over to assessee, since assessee could not access portal post cancellation, impugned order was in violation of principles of natural justice, thus same was to be set aside.
Key Details:
Case Name: SLA Enterprises vs. Deputy State Tax Officer-II
Citation: (2024) 22 Centax 473 (Mad.)
HC seeks explanation from dept. as to why disciplinary action shouldn't be taken for losing original docs of assessee
GST ?|? CASE LAW
GST: Where documents including original purchase invoices submitted by assessee in response to show cause notice was lost by department and contrary letter was issued to assessee stating that department had not received any documents, directions were to be issued to department to show cause as to why disciplinary action should not be taken against concerned officers as assessee required those documents to substantiate its claim which had been prejudiced.
Key Details:
Case Name: Sheshnath Adyaprasad Singh vs. Union of India
Citation: (2024) 22 Centax 472 (Bom.)
HC directs assessee to deposit tax and penalty along with interest for restoration of cancelled GST registration
GST ?|? CASE LAW
GST: Where registration of assessee was cancelled, competent authority was to be directed to restore registration of assessee subject to payment of tax, penalty and interest.
Key Details:
Case Name: Sheikh Mohammad Yousuf vs. Union Territory of J & K
Citation: (2024) 22 Centax 471 (J & K and Ladakh)
HC directs assessee to deposit bank guarantee for release of detained goods
GST ?|? CASE LAW
GST: Where Competent Authority had detained goods of assessee under transport and quantified amount of interest in impugned order, said authority was to be directed to release goods upon assessee depositing bank guarantee.
Key Details:
Case Name: Raja Traders vs. State Tax Officer, GST
Citation: (2024) 22 Centax 470 (Telangana)
HC condoned delay of 2 months 27 days in filing appeal as assessee wasn’t aware of notice issued
GST ?|? CASE LAW
GST: Where an order was passed against assessee for wrongly availing ITC and appeal against same was filed with delay of over 2 months, since assessee was not aware of proceeding as notices and orders were uploaded on GST common portal, in interest of justice, delay in filing appeal was to be condoned and Appeal was to be restored.
Key Details:
Case Name: Mahesh Arts vs. Deputy Commissioner (ST) GST-Appeal, Chennai-I
Citation: (2024) 22 Centax 469 (Mad.)
HC dismissed writ as petitioner had an equally efficacious remedy of filing appeal against cancellation of GST registration
GST ?|? CASE LAW
GST: Where GST registration was cancelled on ground of non-existence at registered address, petitioner was at liberty to file appeal before appellate authority along with relevant documents in support of its contention that it was existing at its principal place of business.
Key Details:
Case Name: AK Enterprises vs. Sales Tax Officer
Citation: (2024) 22 Centax 478 (Del.)
HC set-aside order passed by AO as SCN was uploaded on GST portal under tab 'Additional Notices and Orders'
GST ?|? CASE LAW
GST: Show cause notice projected on portal under tab Additional Notices and Orders would not be valid compliance of SCN requirement.
Key Details:
Case Name: Binsar Automobiles vs. Sales Tax Officer
Citation: (2024) 22 Centax 480 (Del.)
HC remanded matter as no reason was assigned in order dismissing appeal against ex-parte cancellation of registration
GST ?|? CASE LAW
GST: Denial of opportunity of hearing vitiates proceedings as well as orders cancelling registration.
Key Details:
Case Name: Jai Nath Rai Construction vs. State of U.P.
Citation: (2024) 22 Centax 482 (All.)
Delay in filing appeal against cancellation of GST registration to be condoned as delay was due to illness of grandfather of proprietor
GST ?|? CASE LAW
GST: Delay in filing appeal against order of cancellation of GST registration was to be condoned when illness of grandfather of proprietor of petitioner-firm was shown as reason and opportunity should be given to petitioner-firm to contest matter on merits.
Key Details:
Case Name: Man Singh Tanwar vs. Commissioner, Central Goods and Services Tax Department
Citation: (2024) 22 Centax 483 (Raj.)
Vulcanization accelerator for rubber would merit classification under CTH 3812 1000 as “Prepared Rubber Accelerators": AAR
CUSTOMS ?|? CASE LAW
Customs: Vulcanization accelerator for rubber, containing six ingredients in specific proportion and Tetramethylthiuram disulfide constituting only 19%, merit classification under specific Tarif Item 3812 1000 as “Prepared Rubber Accelerators", and not under Heading 3808.
Key Details:
Case Name: In re: JMF Performance Materials Pvt. Ltd.
Citation: (2024) 22 Centax 465 (A.A.R. - Cus. - Mum.)
Roasted Areca/Betel Nuts (whole or cut) are classifiable under CTH 2008 19 20 and not under Heading 0802: 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 Tarif Item 2008 19 20 and not under Heading 0802.
Key Details:
Case Name: In re: Lujee International Company Ltd.
Citation: (2024) 22 Centax 466 (A.A.R. - Cus. - Del.)
CESTAT remanded matter to adjudicating authority to check veracity of CA Certificate to allow refund of SAD
CUSTOMS ?|? CASE LAW
Customs: Fresh Chartered Accountant’s Certificate being produced and no ulterior motive of assessee towards production of earlier certificate being proved, matter remanded to adjudicating authority to check veracity of Certificate and thereafter allow refund of SAD if documents found to be in order.
Key Details:
Case Name: Skylark Office Machines vs. Commissioner of Customs (Port), Kolkata
Citation: (2024) 22 Centax 464 (Tri.-Cal)
Nickel Hydroxide Compound imported for manufacturing positive electrode plates is classifiable under CTH 3824 99 00: CESTAT
CUSTOMS ?|? CASE LAW
Customs: I-MAS POs Big Bag-Nickel compound (compound of nickel hydroxide) imported for manufacturing positive electrode plates of nickel-cadmium batteries, being a mixture of nickel hydroxide (60% to 80%), cobalt hydroxide (1% to 5%) and graphite (12% to 18%), was appropriately classifiable under Tariff Item 3824 99 00 instead of Tariff Item 2825 40 00 of Customs Tariff Act, 1975.
Key Details:
Case Name: SAFT India Pvt. Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Customs, Chennai
Citation: (2024) 22 Centax 460 (Tri.-Mad)
Exhibition of film in multiplex owned by exhibitor on revenue rharing basis wasn't taxable under Business Support Services: SC
EXCISE & SERVICE TAX ?|? CASE LAW
ST: Exhibition of Film in Multiplex owned by Exhibitor on Revenue Sharing basis was not taxable under Business Support Services as no services were provided by Exhibitor to Distributor/Producer, transaction being for mutual benefit of both.
Key Details:
Case Name: Commissioner of Central Excise and Service Tax, Ludhiana vs. AB Motions Pvt. Ltd.
Citation: (2024) 22 Centax 459 (S.C.)
ST leviable on accepting deposits from public on behalf of clients for consideration under various saving schemes: CESTAT
EXCISE & SERVICE TAX ?|? CASE LAW
ST: Activity of accepting deposits from public on behalf of clients/financial company on consideration under various deposit/saving schemes floated by them was a service and leviable to Service Tax under clauses (ii) and (iv) of Section 65(19) of Finance Act, 1994 for period prior to 10-9-2004 and thereafter, under clauses (ii), (vi) and (vii) under category of Business Auxiliary Service.
Key Details:
Case Name: Sahara India vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Lucknow
Citation: (2024) 22 Centax 462 (Tri.-All)
Writ petition against pre-deposit order of Tribunal not to be entertained on ground of alternative remedy: HC
EXCISE & SERVICE TAX ?|? CASE LAW
Excise: High Court having jurisdiction to entertain appeal from any order of Tribunal but writ petition against pre-deposit order of Tribunal ought not to be entertained on ground of alternative remedy as also on ground of lack of territorial jurisdiction.
Key Details:
Case Name: Sashreek Constructors Pvt. Ltd. vs. Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal
Citation: (2024) 22 Centax 467 (Cal.)
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?? ???????? ??????????????????
? ???????????? ?????????????? ????????, ??????????, ?????????????????? & ??????????????????????????, ?????? & ?????????????? ????????????
? ?????? ???????????????????????? ?????????? ?????? ??????, ??????????????, ???????????? & ??????????????-??????