-
NAA - Benefit of reduction in rate of duty has not been passed on to applicants despite the reduction in tax rate - Profiteering allegation upheld.
Director General of Anti- Profiteering vs. Nestle India Ltd.
(2019) TaxCorp(IDT) 3412 (NAA)
-
NAA - Profiteering has to be seen from the prism of the consumer and if he had to pay more than the commensurately reduced price, it amount to profiteering.
Kerala State Screening Committee on Anti-Profiteering and DGAP vs. IFB Industries Ltd.
(2019) TaxCorp(IDT) 3411 (NAA)
-
HC - Quashes seizure order on the ground that till March 31, 2018 it was not mandatory to download the e-way bill from the official website.
M.N. Agencies Shahzadpur vs. Additional Commissioner Grade II Appeal- I Trade Tax Prayagraj & Anr.
(2019) TaxCorp(IDT) 3410 (HC-ALLAHABAD)
-
HC - Prior to any inspection, search and seizure, a recording of reasons by the proper officer for such belief is a requirement of the law and only thereupon the process for search, seizure or confiscation can be undertaken.
Md. Tajal Hussain vs. The State of Assam and 6 Ors.
(2019) TaxCorp(IDT) 3409 (HC-GAUHATI)
-
HC - Writ dismissed - Demand order can be issued to tenants of property for recovery against assessee for assessee's failure to file mandatory GSTR-3B.
Kabeer Reality Private Limited vs. The Union of India & Others
(2019) TaxCorp(IDT) 3407 (HC-MP)
-
The solar modules are fixed on civil foundation and the degree/ mode of annexation has the character of permanence and immovability and, as it involves permanent beneficial enjoyment of the land to which the power plant is installed, it satisfies the condition of things embedded in the earth.
In the matter of McNally Bharat Engineering Company Limited
(2019) TaxCorp(IDT) 3369 (AAR)
-
Applicant can seek for advance ruling for any of the questions u/s 97(2) and applicant’s application is outside the purview of Advance Ruling Authority and hence, refuses to admit the application u/s 98(2).
In the matter of Venkat Rao Tirupathi
(2019) TaxCorp(IDT) 3357 (AAR)
-
Since no Gazette notification was issued appointing 'Proper Officers' and Notification was issued only by "Board" as defined u/s 2(16) of CGST Act and not by 'Government' as defined u/s 2(53) of CGST Act, it was not a valid notification to confer power upon the officers mentioned therein, in terms of Section 3 of CGST Act.
Sri Ravi Agarwal vs. UOI
(2019) TaxCorp(IDT) 3352 (HC-CHHATTISGARH)
-
The petitioner’s TRAN-1 forms shall be accepted if it is filed before December 31, 2019 or extended period (if any) subject to 3 condition viz., (i) assessee failed to upload TRAN-1 due to technical glitches, (ii) such attempt was made during the currency of transitional period and (iii) GST Council has made a recommendation for such extension, being satisfied about such failure.
Jodhpur Truck Pvt. Ltd. vs. Union of India
(2019) TaxCorp(IDT) 3349 (HC-RAJASTHAN)
-
Section 171 clearly links profiteering to be function of each supply of goods or services or both and hence, profiteering needs to be computed at the level of each tax invoice. From a plain reading of Section 171, it is amply clear that the total quantum of profiteering by a registered person is the sum total of all the benefits that stood denied to each of the recipients/consumers individually.
Director General of Anti- Profiteering vs. Signature Global Developers Pvt. Ltd.
(2019) TaxCorp(IDT) 3341 (NAA)
-
Upon introduction of GST, the rate of tax was increased to 18% during post GST period from 6% during pre-GST period and considering the pre-GST credit of CENVAT to the ITC during pre-GST period with ITC available to the Respondent in post-GST period, it is clear that Respondent has benefitted from additional ITC.
Paval Antony vs. Shree Mahalakshmi Enterprises, Doshi Housing, Doshi Towers
(2019) TaxCorp(IDT) 3340 (NAA)
-
Persons having established manufacturing units and paying good amount of direct or indirect taxes and persons against whom there was no documentary or otherwise concrete evidences to establish direct involvement in the evasion of huge amounts of tax, should not be arrested prior to determination of liability and imposition of penalty. Similarly, arrest of Chartered Accountant or Advocates who had filed returns or otherwise assisted in business but were not beneficiary or part of fraud merely on the basis of statement without any corroborative evidence linking the professional with alleged offence should be avoided.
Akhil Krishan Maggu & Anr. Vs. Deputy Director, Directorate General of GST Intelligence & Ors.
(2019) TaxCorp(IDT) 3324 (HC-P&H)
-
Retention of the amount of Rs.84 lacs by the respondents which the assessee was otherwise entitled to get by way of transitional credit would be directly hit by Article 265 of the Constitution of India which provides that no tax shall be levied or collected except by authority of law. The respondents have no legal authority to retain the amount of credit to which the assessee is duly entitled and retention of the same is violative of Article 265 of the Constitution of India.
Jakap Metind Pvt. Ltd. vs. Union of India
(2019) TaxCorp(IDT) 3323 (HC-GUJARAT)
-
No inquiry/ investigating officer has a right to use any method which is not approved by law to extract information from a witness/ suspect during examination and in case it is so done, no one can be allowed to break the law with impunity and has to face the consequences of his action.
Sudhir Kumar Aggarwal vs. Directorate General of GST Intelligence
(2019) TaxCorp(IDT) 3313 (HC-GUJARAT)
-
Merely because the petitioner subsequently amended the registration cannot be a ground to submit that reflecting such goods in the registration was mandatory, without referring to the statutory provision which mandates such requirement.
F. S. Enterprise vs. State of Gujarat
(2019) TaxCorp(IDT) 3312 (HC-GUJARAT)
-
The amount of late fee payable under Section 47 of the said Act, shall stand waived for the registered persons who failed to furnish the said return for the months of July, 2017 to September, 2018 by the due date, but furnished the same between the period from December 22, 2018 to March 31, 2019. Assessee had furnished the return prior to this period.
Mahadeo Construction Co., Palamau vs. Union of India and others
(2019) TaxCorp(IDT) 3311 (HC-JHARKHAND)
-
Competent Authority initiated proceedings for cancellation of registration, and after affording an opportunity of hearing, cancelled registration of the assesse. This Court does not find any error in the judgment rendered by the Deputy Commissioner as well as the Appellate Authority.
Om Trading Company vs. Deputy Commissioner of State Tax & Others
(2019) TaxCorp(IDT) 3310 (HC-MP)
-
Despite the Petitioner’s efforts, the electronic system did not respond due to which Peritioner is likely to suffer loss of credit that it is entitled to by the passage of time.
G.E. T And D, India Limited vs. Union of India and others
(2019) TaxCorp(IDT) 3309 (HC-ALLAHABAD)
-
The Respondents had not released the goods even when the Petitioner had shown willingness to pay tax on the invoice raised and the penalty. Proceeding u/s 130 of the CGST Act is pending directs release of goods upon the Petitioner paying the stipulated amount in the interest of justice.
Shree Ji Traders vs. Union of India
(2019) TaxCorp(IDT) 3308 (HC-GUJARAT)
-
The truck was confiscated on Revenue’s allegation that the transaction was bogus and there was no genuine buyer disclosed in the documents found accompanying the goods.
Smt. Meena Anil Jain vs. State Of U.P. And 3 Others
(2019) TaxCorp(IDT) 3307 (HC-ALLAHABAD)
Headnote lines are open to everyone. The full headnote and the judgment text open with a subscription — see plans or sign in.