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
Order quashed due to lack of SCN service; assessee not required to check GST portal post-cancellation: HC
GST ?|? CASE LAW
GST: Once GST registration is cancelled, mere uploading of show cause notice on GST portal without service through alternative means violates principles of natural justice, as assessee not obligated to check portal post registration cancellation.
Key Details:
Case Name: Ahs Steels vs. Commissioner of State Taxes
Citation: (2024) 24 Centax 103 (All.)
HC remanded matter and directed dept. to provide another opportunity to explain case and establish that there was no mismatch
GST ?|? CASE LAW
GST: Where pursuant to issuance of notices to assessee on common portal, which assessee did not take advantage of, adverse order was passed for mismatch between GSTR-1 and GSTR-3B, in view of fact that assessee had sought one opportunity to explain case and establish that there was no mismatch, matter was to be remitted back for fresh order on merits.
Key Details:
Case Name: Umesh Electricals vs. Commercial Tax Officer
Citation: (2024) 24 Centax 73 (Mad.)
Refund must be processed as the order-in-appeal is final and not challenged by the department: HC
GST ?|? CASE LAW
GST: Where assessee’s claim for refund was approved by appellate authority, refund not processed as Deputy Commissioner was of opinion that Order-in-Appeal not legally sustainable, Order-in-Appeal neither questioned nor assailed by respondents, assessee was to be allowed refund along with statutory interest.
Key Details:
Case Name: Bawa International vs. Joint Commissioner Central Goods and Service Tax, Delhi
Citation: (2024) 24 Centax 8 (Del.)
HC quashed SCN issued by department to re-open settled classification issue accepted by appellate authority
CUSTOMS ?|? CASE LAW
Customs: Reopening classification issue appellate authority had determined for same goods based on test results disclosing substantially similar characteristics of goods, violated requirement that subordinate authority act in accordance with conclusions of appellate authority; show cause notice resurrecting settled classification issue could be interfered with under writ jurisdiction.
Key Details:
Case Name: Asahi India Glass Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Customs, Chennai-II
Citation: (2024) 24 Centax 34 (Mad.)
Clear Float Glass classified under CTH 7005 10 90 is eligible for FTA benefits if imported from Malaysia: CESTAT
CUSTOMS ?|? CASE LAW
Customs: Clear float glass, annealed, non-wired and non-tinted glass, with absorbent layer on tin side which is fluorescent under UV illumination, and meant for decorative, industrial or automotive glass, was classifiable under Tariff Item 7005 10 90 and not under Tariff Item 7005 29 90, and for its import from Malaysia, entitled to benefit under Free Trade Agreement.
Key Details:
Case Name: Swastik Glass Traders vs. Commissioner of Customs
Citation: (2024) 23 Centax 228 (Tri.-Mad)
Matter remanded to Commissioner (Appeals) as refund claim was allowed without recording detailed reasoning: CESTAT
EXCISE & SERVICE TAX ?|? CASE LAW
ST: Where Commissioner (Appeals) allows refund claim without detailed reasoning on key issues, CESTAT can remand matter for reasoned order addressing all points raised by adjudicating authority.
Key Details:
Case Name: Commissioner of Customs, Central Excise & Service Tax, Cochin vs. Holy Faith Builders and Developers Pvt Ltd
Citation: (2024) 24 Centax 161 (Tri.-Bang)
No service tax on renting of immovable property if agreements terminated and consideration refunded
EXCISE & SERVICE TAX ?|? CASE LAW
ST: CESTAT set aside service tax demand on “renting of immovable property service” where agreements were terminated and consideration refunded, as no taxable service exists without valid agreement between provider and recipient.
Key Details:
Case Name: Blue Coast Infrastructure Development Pvt. Ltd. vs. Additional Director General
Citation: (2024) 24 Centax 159 (Tri.-Del)
Recovery proceedings can not continue prior to resolution plan approval by NCLT: CESTAT
EXCISE & SERVICE TAX ?|? CASE LAW
ST: Where assessee company underwent Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) and Resolution Plan was approved by NCLT, CESTAT held that all dues including statutory dues owed to Government, if not part of resolution plan, stand extinguished and appeals before Tribunal stand abated.
Key Details:
Case Name: Jet Airways (India) Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Service Tax-V, Mumbai
Citation: (2024) 24 Centax 146 (Tri.-Bom)
Training for pilots to fly aircraft is exempt from service tax as vocational training: CESTAT
EXCISE & SERVICE TAX ?|? CASE LAW
ST: Training provided by Haryana Institute of Civil Aviation (HICA) for flying aircraft to pilot trainees and landing/parking services to other aircraft not liable to service tax.
Key Details:
Case Name: Commissioner of Central Excise vs. Haryana Institute of Civil aviation
Citation: (2024) 24 Centax 145 (Tri.-Chan)
No suppression of facts if assessee paid service tax on import of services under mistaken belief: CESTAT
EXCISE & SERVICE TAX ?|? CASE LAW
ST: CENVAT credit is admissible on service tax paid under reverse charge mechanism for import of services prior to 18.04.2006, even if paid under mistake of law, and extended period cannot be invoked when legal position was unclear.
Key Details:
Case Name: Ericsson India Pvt. Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Service Tax, New Delhi
Citation: (2024) 24 Centax 144 (Tri.-Chan)
Cenvat credit of CVD and SAD on inputs imported under Advance License was admissible in Central Excise Act: CESTAT
EXCISE & SERVICE TAX ?|? CASE LAW
Excise: Refund of Cenvat credit of CVD and SAD paid in GST regime on inputs imported under Advance License in pre-GST regime was admissible in terms of Section 11B of Central Excise Act, 1944 read with Section 142(3) of Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017.
Key Details:
Case Name: Commissioner of Central Excise & Service Tax vs. Aculife Healthcare Pvt. Ltd.
Citation: (2024) 24 Centax 143 (Tri.-Ahmd)
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?? ???????? ??????????????????
? ???????????? ?????????????? ????????, ??????????, ?????????????????? & ??????????????????????????, ?????? & ?????????????? ????????????
? ?????? ???????????????????????? ?????????? ?????? ??????, ??????????????, ???????????? & ??????????????-??????