Indirect Tax Weekly Round-Up: 18 To 24 August 2024
Mariya Paliwala
25 Aug 2024 9:10 AM IST
Bombay High CourtNon-Submission Of “Bill Of Export” Can't Be Treated As Non-Discharge Of Export Obligation, If Supply To SEZ Unit Is Proved: Bombay High CourtCase Title: Phoenix Industries Limited Versus UOIThe Bombay High Court has held that if the party is able to show proof of supply to the Special Economic Zone (SEZ) Unit, then non-submission of the “Bill of Export” cannot be...
Bombay High Court
Case Title: Phoenix Industries Limited Versus UOI
The Bombay High Court has held that if the party is able to show proof of supply to the Special Economic Zone (SEZ) Unit, then non-submission of the “Bill of Export” cannot be treated as non-discharge of proof of export obligation (EO).
Madras High Court
Commercial Tax Officer Not Obligated To Physically Verify E-Way Bills: Madras High Court
Case Title: S.Doctor Viswanathan Versus The State of Tamil Nadu
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 322
The Madras High Court has quashed the suspension order of a commercial tax officer who issued refunds to fake exporters without verification.
No IGST Is Payable On Ocean Freight Under Reverse Charge Mechanism; Madras High Court Directs Refund
Case Title: Viterra India Pvt Ltd. Versus The Union of India
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 323
The Madras High Court has directed the department to refund the GST paid by the assessee on the ocean freight under the reverse charge mechanism.
Failure To Comply Provision Of Sec 75(4) Of CGST Act 2017 Vitiates Entire Order: Calcutta High Court
Case Title: Arup Mallick versus Commissioner, Commercial Taxes and State Tax, & Ors.
The Calcutta High Court held that failure to comply with statutory provision which mandates consideration of explanation on the part of assessee before passing adverse order, vitiates such order.
Case Title: Tvl.Deepa Traders Versus The Deputy Commissioner (ST)
The Madras High Court has condoned the delay of 285 days in filing the appeal on the grounds that the notices were uploaded on the GST portal but no hard copy was served on the assessee.
Allahabad High Court
Case Title: The Commissioner, Commercial Tax V. M/S Emami Ltd. 2024
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (AB) 523
The Allahabad High Court has upheld the Commercial Tax Tribunal, Lucknow's finding that Boro Plus Ayurvedic Cream is a 'medicated ointment' and not an 'antiseptic cream'. It was held that Boro Plus Ayurvedic Cream is taxable at 5% under Entry 41 Schedule II of the Uttar Pradesh Value Added Tax Act, 2008.
Case Title: M/S Anil Rice Mill v. State Of U.P. And 2 Others
Recently, the Allahabad High Court has held that production of tax invoice, e-way bill, GR or payment details is not sufficient to show the actual physical movement of the transaction for the purposes of availing Input Tax Credit under Section 16 of the Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017.
Calcutta High Court
Case Title: Commissioner Of Customs (Preventive), West Bengal Versus Bangari Bhola And Others
The Calcutta High Court has upheld the seizure and held that the Commissioner of Customs (Preventive), West Bengal, has jurisdiction over the whole of the States of West Bengal and Sikkim.
Case Title: United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Versus Kevalji Lumbaji Harijan(Dabhi) & Ors.
LL Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Guj) 114
The Gujarat High Court has ruled that the Geo Membrane, a textile fabric used for waterproof lining, is subject to a 12% GST rate rather than the previously applied 18%. The court has directed the GST department to refund the excess 6% GST paid by the petitioner.
