Recent  Tax Judgements from Courts

 

 

 

The Supreme Court of India

16th Sept : J.K. Lakshmi Cement Ltd. Vs CTO, Pali

7th Sept : Girish Raghunath Mehta Vs Insp of Customs & Anr

6th Sept : Commr of Commercial Tax, U.P. Vs A.R. Thermosets (Pvt.) Ltd.

5th Sept : Larsen & Toubro Ltd Vs Addl DC Commrcl Taxes & Anr

2nd Sept : Hindustan Lever Vs St of Karnataka

29th Aug : CCE, Madras Vs M/s Addison & Co. Ltd.

8th Aug : CCE Vs Gujarat Ambuja Exports Ltd.

30th June : Dy Commr of Commrcl Taxes (Vigilance) Vs Hindustan Lever Ltd.

3rd June :Sarla Performance Fibers Limited Etc. Vs CCE, Surat-II

 

Kerala High Court

5th Sept : Roche Diagnostics I Pvt. Ltd. Vs The CTO, (ENQUIRY) & Ors

 

 

Calcutta High Court

15th Sept : Mishra & Mishra Agencies & Anr. Vs UOI & Anr.

15th Sept : LGW Limited Vs. Union of India & Ors.

 

 

Bombay High Court 

16th Sept : Under Water Services Company Ltd Vs. UOI

23rd August : Commr of Sales Tax, Maharashtra v/s Bajaj Tempo Ltd.

16th August : Commr of Sales Tax Vs Bhima Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd.

18th July : D. P. Jain & Co Vs Commr of CEx& ST Nagpur

 

Allahabad High Court

31st August : D.C. Food Pdcts Vs Commr Of Trade Tax, U.P. Lucknow

30th August : CCE, Meerut Vs Anand Tissues Ltd.

24th August : Prema Construction Vs ACCE& ST & Ors

 

 

Madras High Court

20th June, 2016 : CCEST, LTU, Chennai Vs. M/s.EID Parry (India) Ltd.

15th June 2016: M/s.Falcon Types Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Customs (Seaport-Import), Chennai.

 

 

 


 

11th May, 2016 : The Supreme Court of India : CIT, Mumbai Vs Amitabh Bachan

 

6th May, 2016

Delhi High Court : M.F. Rings & Bearing Races Ltd. & sevral others Vs CC & Anr.

Supreme Court  : CCE, Raigad Vs M/s. Ispat Metallics Industries Ltd. & Ors.

 

4th May, 2016

Allahabad High Court :  CCE Vs Vikram Cement & Anil Kumar Gupta

 

2nd May, 2016 : Allahabad High Court : M/s BHEL Vs Commr Of Commercial Tax

28th April, 2016 : Gujarat High Court : M/s Lubi Industries  Vs UOI & Anr.

27th April, 2016 : Gujarat High Court :  Dharmesh Devchand Pansuriya Vs UOI & 3 Ors

22nd April, 2016 : Supreme Court : Visvesvaraya Technological University Vs ACIT

13th April, 2016 : Gujarat High Court : Anil Ltd  Vs UOI & 3 Ors.

13th April, 2016 : Bombay High Court : Director of Income Tax (Exemptions) vs M/s Lala Lajpatrai Memorial Trust

11th April, 2016  : Gujarat High Court : CCEST,Surat I Vs M/s. Jai Bhawani Metal Ind

30th March, 2016 : The Supreme Court of India : Commr of Central Excise Vs Grasim Industries Ltd

30th March, 2016 : The Supreme Court of India : Commr of Central Excise Vs Grasim Industries Ltd

29th March, 2016 : The Supreme Court of India : Commissioner of Income Tax -4, Mumbai Vs  M/s Kotak Securities Ltd.

4th March, 2016 : The Supreme Court of India : The State of Punjab & Ors Vs Shreyans Industries Ltd. Etc

4th March, 2016 : Orissa High Court : The CCEST, Bhubaneswar-I Vs M/s. Ballarpur Industries Limited

3rd March, 2016  : Delhi High Court : Sanjay Swaroop Vs DGCEI- criminal bail application

26th February, 2016 : The Supreme Court of India :  M/s. Electro Optics (P) Ltd. Vs State of Tamil Nadu

25th February, 2016 : Bombay High Court : HDFC Bank Ltd. Mumbai v/s. The Deputy Commissioner of Income

23rd February, 2016 : The Supreme Court of India : Securities and Exchange Board of India Vs Kishore R. Ajmera

18th February, 2016The Supreme Court of India : Jagraon Exports Vs CIT Ludhiana : proceeds  from  sale  of scrap not to be included  in  total  turnover  for  deduction under Section 80HHC of IT Act.

15th February, 2016 : The Supreme Court of India : Air Customs Officer IGI New Delhi Vs Pramod Kumar Dhamija

16th February, 2016 : Bombay High Court : Johnson Matthey Chemicals India Pvt. Ltd. Vs The State of Maharashtra & Ors

12th February, 2016 : The Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in State of Jharkhand & Ors.  Vs Tata Steel Ltd. & Ors. rules in the tax deferment scheme "repayment schedule is 5 years from the expiry of eligibility period of deferment. The period of 5 years has to be so arranged that it does not go beyond 13 years from the date of deferment." Read the judgement

3rd February, 2016 : Delhi High Court : Brilliant Metal Pvt Ltd Vs Commissioner of Trade Taxes

25th  January, 2016 : Bombay High Court : JSW Steel Ltd & Ors Vs Union of India, DGFT & Ors

1st February, 2016 :Delhi High Court : Ingram Micro India Pvt Ltd Vs Commr of Trade Taxes & Anr : Revenue order set aside & tax authority directed to issue a C-Form. 

29th January, 2016Commr of Commercial Taxes Vs K.T.C. Automobiles: The Supreme Court upheld Kerala High Court dismissing the appeal filed by Commr of Commercial Taxes. The authorities had alleged 263 cars were wrongly shown as sold and registered (under MV Act) from the dealer's Mahe Branch (Puducherry) when in fact the sale transactions were concluded in Kozhikode, Kerala. It was alleged this approach was meant to escape higher tax liability in Kerala for a lower tax rate applicable in Puducherry.

20th January, 2016 : By an order dated 20th January, 2016, the Allahabad High Court in VN Dyers Vs CCE has allowed the petitioner appeal while determining that the letter of protest filed by the petitioner was valid in the context of time limitation to file refunds under section 11B. The Hon'ble Court held : "the letter of protest has to be read as a whole and not in portion.....The appellant requested for re-determination of the annual capacity and consequently, the duty payable, and contended that hence onwards the duty would be paid under protest till the annual capacity and duty is redetermined."

18th January, 2016 : In Ganapathy & Co, Bangalore Vs Commissioner of Income Tax, Supreme Court of India. Dismisses the petitioner's appeal against the High Court Judgement 

12th January, 2016 : Allahabad High Court in O.P. Engineering  Vs The Commissioner, Trade Tax, U.P. Lucknow answered the questions raised in revision in favour of the petitioner while disagreeing with the department's view that Aluminium Grills, Aluminium Diffusers and Dumpers are all parts of air conditioners. The department had chosen this classification and thereby assessed these items at the higher 15% rate  instead of 10%. Read the judgement

7th January, 2016 : Supreme Court of India : Commissioner of Income Tax XVIII Delhi Vs Bank of Scotia : The Apex Court dismisses Revenue appeal against ITAT order cancelling the penalty u/s 271-C saying "it is necessary to establish that there was contumacious conduct on the part of the assessee."

7th January, 2016 : Kerala High Court in  George Mathew Vs Superintendent of Central Excise grants conditional bail inter alia requiring the amount demanded in the notice to be paid as a condition for bail.

5th January, 2016 : Madhya Pradesh High Court in Commissioner of Income Tax I  Vs Central Tobacco Products Pvt. Ltd. hasdisposedthe appeal based on the CBDT circular which prescribes a minimum limit for Revenue appeals.The FM and PM have been vocal about reducing needless litigation and  towards this CBDT has also prescribed an amount less than Rs. 20 lacs  below which no appeals will be filed. Yet the Revenue continues to file and pursue such appeals.  This appeal was not withdrawn by Revenue.

Skol Breweries wins petition before Punjab & Harayana High Court against the sales tax levy of purchase tax u/s 6   Act and disallowance of set-off u/s 15A of the HGST Act.  Court agrees with the petitioner that Tribunal appears to have wrongly relied on Thomas & Katyal Pvt. Ltd.  v. St of Haryana . Matter remanded. Skol Breweries Ltd. Vs State of Haryana.

22nd December, 2015 : Calcutta High Court set aside the Income Tax notice issued to the petitioner  in Maersk Line U.K. Ltd  Vs Dy Director of Income Tax saying : "this Court is of the view that the noticee is a person covered under the treaty and being an enterprise of the UK, the same has fiscal domicile in the UK where it is based. Its income from operation of ships in international traffic is not exigible to tax under domestic law. Consequently the impugned notices are set aside and the writ petitions disposed of."

23rd December, 2015 : Bombay High Court in Balkrishna Industries Ltd. Vs UOI and others dismissed the petition seeking exemption from safeguard duty (SD) on imports from China under advance authorizations as per Notification No.96/2009. The court also rejected the petitioner's claim that a TRU office memo indicated the Govt's view. The Court while rejecting this said, an office memo is merely an interpretation  no corrigendum or amendment was made to the Notification.

20th January, 2016 : By an order dated 20th January, 2016, the Allahabad High Court in VN Dyers Vs CCE has allowed the petitioner appeal while determining that the letter of protest filed by the petitioner was valid in the context of time limitation to file refunds under section 11B. The Hon'ble Court held : "the letter of protest has to be read as a whole and not in portion.....The appellant requested for re-determination of the annual capacity and consequently, the duty payable, and contended that hence onwards the duty would be paid under protest till the annual capacity and duty is redetermined."

14th December, 2015 : Delhi High Court in Citibank Vs Commissioner of Sales Tax has ruled that disposal of repossessed cars by CitiBank constitutes a "sale" and the banking activity in that context amounts to business under 2(c)(i) of DST. Consequently, Citibank would be a "dealer" within the meaning of Section 2 (e) read with Section 2 (c) of the Delhi Sales Tax Act. Based on this conclusion, the Hon'ble High Court upheld the Tribunal order that the sale of the repossessed cars by Citibank is "incidental or ancillary or in connection with the Appellant’s business".

12th January, 2016 : Allahabad High Court in O.P. Engineering  Vs The Commissioner, Trade Tax, U.P. Lucknow answered the questions raised in revision in favour of the petitioner while disagreeing with the department's view that Aluminium Grills, Aluminium Diffusers and Dumpers are all parts of air conditioners. The department had chosen this classification and thereby assessed these items at the higher 15% rate  instead of 10%. Read the judgement

7th January, 2016 : Supreme Court of India : Commissioner of Income Tax XVIII Delhi Vs Bank of Scotia : The Apex Court dismisses Revenue appeal against ITAT order cancelling the penalty u/s 271-C saying "it is necessary to establish that there was contumacious conduct on the part of the assessee."

7th January, 2016 : Kerala High Court in  George Mathew Vs Superintendent of Central Excise grants conditional bail inter alia requiring the amount demanded in the notice to be paid as a condition for bail.

5th January, 2016 : Madhya Pradesh High Court in Commissioner of Income Tax I  Vs Central Tobacco Products Pvt. Ltd. has disposed the appeal based on the CBDT circular which prescribes a minimum limit for Revenue appeals.The FM and PM have been vocal about reducing needless litigation and  towards this CBDT has also prescribed an amount less than Rs. 20 lacs  below which no appeals will be filed. Yet the Revenue continues to file and pursue such appeals.  This appeal was not withdrawn by Revenue.

 

GST A Brief Presentation dated 6th April, 2017

Click Here

The Finance Act 2017 comes into effect from 31st March 2017

All changes introduced through various sections in Central Acts, through the Finance Bill will therefore take effect from 31st March, 2017 unless specified.

A New Feature :

Advanced Case Law Search

 

7th April, 2016

The “Advanced Case Law Search” feature in TaxQuotient  enables search on separate parameters such as Court, Tax Type, Date (from & to Range), appellant, respondent and even keywords. This helps you in locating case law you are searching for swiftly.

TIP: #1 : If you want to view the latest cases, just enter the start and end dates keeping all other boxes blank. You will get a list of all available indirect tax cases during that period.

TIP # 2 : Please keep the date range (start to end date) for upto 6 months.

TIP # 3 : Don't forget to reset the search to clear the earlier results before a new search.

Click to enter Advanced Case Law Search

 GST Bill passed by Parliament

 

 

 

The 122nd Constitution Amendment Bill introduced in Parliament in December 2014 has been passed by the Rajya Sabha and now also by the Lok Sabha with the amendments.  Now the Bill must get ratified by at least half the number of 31 State Legislatures which means 16 States and then finally get the approval from the President.

Thereafter the GST Council has to be set up which will determine the GST design at the granular level. This will include the structure of GST including scope of CGST, SGST and IGST, the taxes subsumed, the items/commodities covered and other critical aspects such as the threshold limits for taxability, exemptions, and several other parameters critical for an ideal  GST.

Further, for the GST to operate smoothly, the taxes paid on goods and services at every stage in the value chain needs to be tracked. This requires an IT infrastructure which will track the transactions and taxes paid and form the back-bone of GST. Reportedly considerable work has been already done on it, nevertheless it will need changes to correctly reflect the GST Law proposed by the GST Council and accepted by the Central & State Legislatures.

Last but not the least,  the tax authorities and other stakeholders who will implement the GST need to be trained for a smooth introduction.

Seven questions to know if you 

are paying taxes 

correctly?

If you are the CFO or the Tax Head you ought to read this. Click Here

CESTAT rejects appeal, holds - sample testing a must as importer didn't produce any certificate

On 7th April, 2017 in Maa Bhagwati Coke Vs CC,Jamnagar, CESTAT Ahmedabad rejected the appeal for exemption on imported coal claiming the ash content was <12% and distinguished a SC judgment relied upon by the appellant. The Tribunal held that on testing the coal samples, the report confirmed ash content at 13.1% also the test was necessary saying:

"....it is seen that the appellant have relied on the decision of Honble Apex Court to assure that there was no reason to get the coal tested. However, in the said case, the importer had produced a certificate of CASCOs regarding the ash content of the imported coal. In the instant case, the record shows that no such certificate was produced. In absence of the certificate, it was necessary to get the sample tested in view of the claim of notification by the appellant."

CESTAT Updates

June- July 2016

 

Brief update on CESTAT judgements passed during June 2016 to July 2016. Please note this update is not a summary of the cases but only leads on important issues decided. The links to the judgments are also provided for the full text.

Click here for update

Our Main Services 

in Indirect Taxes

 

  • Business structuring and tax planning
  • Review of end-to-end business processes for indirect taxes
  • Strategy to prevent litigation, representation and litigation support
  • Tax compliance and tax control framework
  • Support on specific issues
Go to top