Indirect Taxes Weekly Round-Up: 19 To 25 May 2024
Mariya Paliwala
27 May 2024 9:00 AM IST
Delhi High CourtAdditions U/s 69C Based Merely On CBIC Information Can't Be Sustained: Delhi High CourtCase Title: Bausch And Lomb India Private Limited Vs Assessment UnitThe Delhi High Court sets aside the assessment order and remits the matter to AO on the ground that the additions of Rs.70.10 Cr. made under Section 69C as unexplained expenditure based merely on information received...
Delhi High Court
Additions U/s 69C Based Merely On CBIC Information Can't Be Sustained: Delhi High Court
Case Title: Bausch And Lomb India Private Limited Vs Assessment Unit
The Delhi High Court sets aside the assessment order and remits the matter to AO on the ground that the additions of Rs.70.10 Cr. made under Section 69C as unexplained expenditure based merely on information received from Central Board of Indirect Taxes & Customs (CBIC) is unsustainable.
Allahabad High Court
Case Title: The Commissioner, Commercial Tax U.P. v. M/S R.P. Milk Made Products (P) Ltd. 2024 LiveLaw (AB) 328 [SALES/TRADE TAX REVISION No.123 of 2023]
Case citation: 2024 LiveLaw (AB) 328
The Allahabad High Court has held that plant and machinery sold after the closure of business are capital goods under Section 2(f) of the Uttar Pradesh Value Added Tax Act, 2008 and are excluded from levy of tax under the amended definition of 'business' under Section 2(e) of the Act.
Case Title: M/S S Kumar Construction v. Commissioner Of Central Excise (Appeals), Central Goods And Services Tax (Appeals) And Another
The Allahabad High Court has held that the limitations prescribed under special statutes, such as Finance Act, 1994 will prevail over the limitations mentioned in the Limitation Act, 1963.
Rajasthan High Court
Crane Services To Transport Department Does Not Constitute Sale: Rajasthan High Court
Case Title: Assistant Commercial Taxes Officer Versus M/s Agarwal Carriers And Lifters
The Rajasthan High Court, Jaipur Bench has held that crane services to the transport department does not constitute sale.
Gujarat High Court
Case Title: NEPRA Resources Management Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. Vs State of Gujarat & Anr.
LL Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Guj) 69
The Gujarat High Court has ruled that the Notified Area Authority, Vapi, does not qualify as a local authority or governmental authority. As a result, the Solid Waste Management and recycling services provided to it are not eligible for exemption under Notification No. 12/2017-State Tax (Rate) dated 30th June 2017.
Case Title: Vimal Agro Products Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. Vs Union of India & Ors
LL Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Guj) 70
The Gujarat High Court has upheld the imposition of a 12 percent tax on Mango Pulp since the inception of GST. The court clarified that Circular No. 179/11/2022-GST dated August 3, 2022, and Notification No. 06/2022 dated July 13, 2022, simply reinforce that mango pulp falls under the 12 percent GST bracket, specifically after the inclusion of "Mangoes (other than mangoes, sliced, dried)" following guava.
Gujarat High Court Grants Bail To Metal Industries Proprietor In Rs. 6.67 Crore GST Evasion Case
Case Title: Dipen Champaklal Shah Vs State of Gujarat
LL Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Guj) 71
The Gujarat High Court has granted bail in a case of GST evasion amounting to Rs. 6.67 Crores to the proprietor of Metal Industries, a business engaged in manufacturing and trading brass products, metal scrap, etc. in Jamnagar after 79 days of cost.
Meghalaya High Court
Right Of Appeal Relating To Value Of Service Maintainable Before Supreme Court: Meghalaya High Court
Case Title: The Commissioner of Central Goods & Services Tax and Central Excise Versus M/s Walchandnagar Industries Limited
The Meghalaya High Court has held that the right of appeal relating to the value of service is maintainable before the Supreme Court.
Calcutta High Court
Case Title: M/S. Anurag Steel Enterprise Versus Commissioner Of Cgst & Central Excise, Howrah Cgst & Cx Commissionerate
The Calcutta High Court has held that the alleged retraction on the grounds of the appeal filed before the Commissioner after a period of three years and nine months was rightly rejected by the Commissioner of Appeals.
