Supreme CourtCustoms Act | Owner Of Goods Liable To Pay Customs Duty Even After Confiscated Goods Are Redeemed Paying Fine : Supreme CourtCase Title: M/S Navayuga Engineering Co. Ltd. Versus Union Of India & Anr.Citation : 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 504In a notable ruling relating to the Customs Act of 1962, the Supreme Court on Tuesday (July 23) held that the importer would be liable to pay...
Supreme Court
Case Title: M/S Navayuga Engineering Co. Ltd. Versus Union Of India & Anr.
Citation : 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 504
In a notable ruling relating to the Customs Act of 1962, the Supreme Court on Tuesday (July 23) held that the importer would be liable to pay customs duty in addition to fines and other charges upon redeeming the confiscated goods.
Delhi High Court
Case Title: Vijendra Singh Versus Commissioner Of Customs
The Delhi High Court has held that the revoking suspension of license cannot restrict the customs department from inquiring for imposition of penalty.
Case Title: Aradhya Export Import Consultants Pvt Ltd Verses Commissioner Of Customs
The Delhi High Court held that a custom broker cannot be held guilty of having failed to discharge the obligation placed in terms of Regulation 10(n) of CBLR 2018, simply because he has not carried out physical verification of the veracity of the exporter.
Madras High Court
Interest Can't Be Demanded When Entire Stamp Duty Paid During Pendency Of Appeal: Madras High Court
Case Title: The Chief Revenue Controlling Authority Chennai Versus R.Muniyandi
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 288
The Madras High Court has held that interest cannot be demanded when the entire amount as demanded by the authorities has been paid even during the pendency of the appeal.
Gujarat High Court
Case Title: Commissioner Of Customs Versus Baburam Harichand
LL Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Guj) 95
The Gujarat High Court has upheld the decision of the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) allowing the refund of Special Additional Duty (SAD) on betel nuts. The court observed that there is no distinction between industrial grade betel nuts and edible supari.
Gauhati High Court
Interest Can't Be Levied When No Taxable Due Is Found: Gauhati High Court
Case Title: IOCL Versus The State Of Assam
The Gauhati High Court has held that once the assessment order of the authorities is set aside and the matter is remanded back and assessed, no taxable interest can be levied.
Kerala High Court
Case Title: Mythree Associates Versus Commercial Tax Officer
The Kerala High Court has held that the petitioner/assessee has paid tax at the prescribed rate on the materials procured by him from the Travancore Devaswom Board, and since this amount has already been paid over to the State Exchequer, any denial of credit to the assessee solely on the ground that the Travancore Devaswom Board/Truvabharanam Commissioner was not registered under the KVAT Act would be unjust.
Case Title: Indian Medical Association Versus UOI
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 469
The Kerala High Court has dismissed the writ petition filed by the Indian Medical Association challenging the levy of GST on supply of goods and services to its members.
Goods Transported For Own Use, No Intention To Evade Tax, Kerala High Court Deletes Penalty
Case Title: State Of Kerala Versus Petrolink Data Services (P) Ltd.
The Kerala High Court has held that the assessee, immediately after the goods were detained, produced the statutory declarations in Form 16 to demonstrate that the goods that were being transported were for the own use of the assessee.
Kerala High Court Allows Adjustment Refund Amount Towards Amount payable under Amnesty Scheme
Case Title: S. Vijayan Versus Commissioner Of State Goods And Service Taxes
The Kerala High Court has held that it is open to the department to consider an adjustment of the refund amount due to the appellant towards the amounts due from him by way of settlement under the Amnesty Scheme.
Rajasthan High Court
Case Title: M/s Power Grid Corporation Of India Ltd. Versus State of Rajasthan
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Raj) 172
The Rajasthan High Court, Jaipur Bench, has quashed the AAR's order rejecting the application for the advance ruling as not maintainable on the grounds that the applicant was not the supplier.
Case Title: Sree Murali Mohana Boiled & Raw Rice Mill Pvt. Ltd. Versus UOI
The Andhra Pradesh High Court has held that the trade notification issued by the Directorate General of Foreign Trade (DGFT) prohibiting export of non-basmati white rice cannot have retrospective effect.
Allahabad High Court
Case Title: M/S Rajdhani Arms Corporation, Lucknow Thru. Propreitor, Seema Sarna v. Commissioner Of Commercial Tax U.P., Commercial Tax Bhawan,Lucknow
The Allahabad High Court has held that the term “ex-parte” in Rule 63(4) of the Uttar Pradesh Value Added Tax Rules, 2008 can be interpreted as for want of representation of the defendant after service of notice, the case may be decided on merits. However, when the appellant or his counsel is not present, the case may only be dismissed in default.
Calcutta High Court
Case Title: Commissioner Of Service Tax verses G.S. Atwal & Co. Engineering Pvt Ltd.
Citation : 2024 LiveLaw (Cal) 176
The Calcutta High Court held that no service tax will be levied on activities such as cutting or mineral extraction which are part of mining operations, if mining operations are itself not subjected to service tax on the date of levy.
Telangana High Court
Non-Filing Of GST Return Due To Technical Glitch, Bank Can't Be Penalised: Telangana High Court
Case Title: M/s. Standard Chartered Bank Vs. The Principal Commissioner of Central Tax & others.
The Telangana High Court has held that the petitioner bank could not file its return in the GST portal because of a technical glitch and cannot be saddled with demand, penalty, and interest.