-
Keeping in view that the investigation is going on and apprehensions of applicant tampering with the evidence can not be ruled out. This Court is not inclined to grant bail to the applicant at this stage.
Shailesh Rajpal vs. Commissioner
(2020) TaxCorp(IDT) 3463 (HC-MP)
-
Obligation u/s 33 of the Act provides that while raising an invoice the amount of tax is to be indicated in the tax invoice. Clause 35 provides that the rates quoted by the petitioner shall be deemed to be inclusive of taxes and hence he shall be obliged to include the tax component in the invoice.
K. Ananthakrishna Shetty vs. Mangalore Mahanagara Palike
(2020) TaxCorp(IDT) 3462 (HC-KARNATAKA)
-
Petitioner was involved in using data of individuals for creating fake firms to claim ITC by getting issued 3 pan cards in different names of 26 fake firms which were registered but not functional.
Mohammed Yunus vs.State of Rajasthan
(2020) TaxCorp(IDT) 3461 (HC-RAJASTHAN)
-
The impugned proceedings were already deferred by the Respondent as the petitioner had time to file the statutory appeal and said time was not expired. The writ petitions shall not be adjudicated further as the Respondent had chosen to defer the proceedings through said communication.
GRB Dairy Foods Pvt. Ltd. vs. The State of Tax Officer
(2020) TaxCorp(IDT) 3460 (HC-MADRAS)
-
If the petitioner furnishes a bank guarantee for the tax and penalty amount determined, Revenue shall release the consignment and the vehicle to the petitioner.
Royal Traders vs. The Assistant State Tax Officer
(2020) TaxCorp(IDT) 3459 (HC-KERALA)
-
If the Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes finds prima-facie case in favour of the petitioners based on their representations, it is open to him to approach the GSTN and seek for access to GST Network.
Helvetica Lifestyle Boutique Private Ltd. vs. The Goods and Service Tax Network
(2020) TaxCorp(IDT) 3458 (HC-MADRAS)
-
GST Authorities and the concerned Nodal Officer are directed to take necessary steps in accordance with the law within the due date i.e. December 31, 2019 and to accept and scrutinize the Form TRAN 1.
Gulf Ashley Motors Limited vs. Goods and Service Tax Council
(2020) TaxCorp(IDT) 3457 (HC-JHARKHAND)
-
Section 17(5)(d) provides that no ITC is available for goods or services received by a taxable person for construction of an immovable property on his own though used in course or furtherance of business. As the applicant has built the marriage hall for leasing/renting to customers, no ITC shall be available on any goods or services received by him for such construction in terms of Section 17(5) (d).
In the matter of Sree Varalakshmi Mahaal LLP
(2019) TaxCorp(IDT) 3450 (AAR)
-
The one lump sum consideration amount received from customers consists for consultancy and service rendered along with price for the duty credit /transferable incentive at premium. Both activities are independent and applicant can very well supply only the duty credit scrip by buying it and reselling or only acting as a consultant for the transaction by identifying the seller of the scrip and getting it transferred in client’s name.
In the matter of R.B. Shah Enterprises India Private Limited
(2019) TaxCorp(IDT) 3449 (AAR)
-
Petitioners have been victim of technical glitches on account of confusion during transitional phase and should not be denied the substantive benefit of the IGST paid by them on exports.
TMA International Pvt Ltd. & Ors. vs. Union of India & Anr.
(2020) TaxCorp(IDT) 3448 (HC-DELHI)
-
In terms of Section 12(4), the time of supply of such gift vouchers/ gift cards by the applicant to the customer shall be (i) the date of issue of vouchers if the vouchers are specific to any particular goods specified against the voucher and, (ii) the date of redemption of voucher if the gift vouchers/gift cards are redeemable against any goods (jewellery) bought.
In the matter of Kalyan Jewellers India Ltd.
(2020) TaxCorp(IDT) 3447 (AAR)
-
Pooja oil involves five vegetable oils (rice bran oil, sesame oil, coconut oil, castor oil and mahua oil) being mixed in an agreed percentage in a large tank and then blended with fragrance and hence shall be classifiable under sub heading 1518 00 40 of Customs Tariff as inedible mixtures or preparations of vegetable fats or oils or of fractions of different fats or oils.
In the matter of S.K. Aagrotechh
(2020) TaxCorp(IDT) 3446 (AAR)
-
Appellant received mobilization advance equal to 10% of original contract value which is recoverable as adjustment towards payment due for the tax invoices that the appellant raises on attaining contract progress milestones.
In the matter of Siemens Ltd.
(2020) TaxCorp(IDT) 3445 (AAR)
-
There is no therapeutic value in Nicotine Polacrilex Lozenge other than that it is only an aid of cessation of smoking and helps to reduce the withdrawal symptoms. The product stands excluded from being classified under Chapter 30 but is a chemical preparation aptly classifiable under Chapter 38.24.
In the matter of Strides Emerging Markets Ltd.
(2020) TaxCorp(IDT) 3444 (AAR)
-
In terms of Rule 129(2), during the course of investigation, in case it comes to the notice of DGAP that a registered person has not passed on the benefits to those persons who have not filed complaint against registered person, he is legally bound to investigate the same and bring such violation before the Authority for determination of those benefits to eligible recipients.
Potnoor Naveen and DGAP vs. Caroa Properties LLP
(2019) TaxCorp(IDT) 3443 (NAA)
-
Both services are not naturally bundled, as the applicant has agreed to the obligation to match the cost of financing the project of printing from the proceeds from selling space for advertisement. Consideration for doing it successfully is 75% of the amount by which the proceeds from selling space for advertisement exceeds printing cost while if it fails in its obligation, it has to pay the Club a charge for tolerating the failure.
In the matter of Infobase Services Pvt. Ltd.
(2019) TaxCorp(IDT) 3441 (AAR)
-
Applicant is supplying mixes and dough for preparation of biscuits and other bakers’ wares, whether or not preparation of the final edible item involves further baking or frying, which is classifiable under tariff item 1901 20 00.
In the matter of Ambo Agritec Pvt. Ltd.
(2019) TaxCorp(IDT) 3440 (AAR)
-
While chicken meat is used as a filling in most of the products where bread or baked flour is used, the baked product (sandwich, puff, patty, burger, etc.) are distinct food preparations which will survive even if chicken meat is excluded from the filling. Therefore, they are not food preparations based on chicken meat and such baker’s wares cannot be classified under HSN 1601.
In the matter of Switz Foods Pvt. Ltd.
(2019) TaxCorp(IDT) 3439 (AAR)
-
Section 130 can be invoked even in cases where the amount of tax and penalty is paid in terms of Section 129, provided, the case falls under any of 5 eventualities prescribed u/s 130(1) in which case fine can be imposed over and above the tax and penalty.
Synergy Fertichem Pvt. Ltd. vs. State of Gujarat
(2019) TaxCorp(IDT) 3437 (HC-GUJARAT)
-
In the instant case, the same date on which the bail application was filed, the prosecution had filed the charge sheet, and hence violation of Article 21 (Personal Liberty) does not arise.
Arvind Kumar Munka vs. The Union of India
(2019) TaxCorp(IDT) 3436 (HC-CALCUTTA)
Headnote lines are open to everyone. The full headnote and the judgment text open with a subscription — see plans or sign in.