-
Statutory Interest is payable u/s 56 when the principal amount towards refund is processed by Revenue in delayed tranches.
Ankush Auto Deals vs Commissioner of DGST & Anr.
(2022) TaxCorp(IDT) 6593 (HC-DELHI)
-
Blocking of bank account via a communication purportedly in exercise of powers u/s 83 of CGST Act is not tenable without complying with the jurisdictional prerequisites embedded in section 83.
Zuric Traders vs The Commissioner, Customs and Central Excise, Delhi and anr.
(2022) TaxCorp(IDT) 6592 (HC-DELHI) · Section 83
-
It is a fit case where discretion could be exercised in favour of the applicants and moreover, seriousness of the offences alone is not conclusive of the applicant's entitlement to bail.
Subodh Kumar Garg vs. Union of India
(2022) TaxCorp(IDT) 6591 (HC-ALLAHABAD)
-
It is a one line order containing no detailed supporting reasons and that the order of the appellate authority is also one line order dismissing the Assessee’s appeal on the ground of delay in filing the appeal, without going into the merit of the appeal.
Usha Gupta vs. The Assistant Commissioner of State Tax
(2022) TaxCorp(IDT) 6590 (HC-CALCUTTA)
-
The tax on the portion of constructed area shared with the land owner-promoter has to be paid by applicant as his liability in the capacity of developer-promoter and not as Reverse charge mechanism. The land owner- promoter will claim such tax as ITC.
In the matter of Bhavani Developers
(2022) TaxCorp(IDT) 6589 (AAR)
-
The order of cancellation of the registration on the ground that no reply was given is equally lacking in terms of a quasi-judicial fervor as the same does not contain any reasoning whatsoever.
DRS Wood Products vs. State of U.P.
(2022) TaxCorp(IDT) 6585 (HC-ALLAHABAD)
-
After voluntary payment is done and accepted in Form DRC-03 and order issued in Form MOV-09, non-generation of summary of an order under Form DRC-07 cannot result in the right of person to file an appeal u/s 107 being deprived.
Hindustan Steel and Cement vs Assistant State Tax Officer
(2022) TaxCorp(IDT) 6584 (HC-KERALA)
-
Cesses could not be carried forward under the GST-regime and therefore, could not be considered as Input Tax Credit and the same could not be considered while calculating the profiteered amount.
Nilang Shastri and DGAP vs. Swati Realty
(2022) TaxCorp(IDT) 6570 (NAA)
-
The DGAP’s verification is inconclusive and it cannot be concluded that all such homebuyers/customers have got the benefit of ITC that was required to be passed.
DGAP vs. Himalaya Real Estate Pvt Ltd.
(2022) TaxCorp(IDT) 6569 (NAA)
-
Anti-profiteering clause is not applicable against Respondent’s project Epic as all the events like launch of project, bookings and allotment of the units happened in the post-GST era.
DGAP vs. Elan Ltd
(2022) TaxCorp(IDT) 6568 (NAA)
-
The benefit of reduction in the tax rate has not been passed on to the recipients by way of commensurate reduction in the prices in terms of section 171 (1) of the CGST Act, 2017.
Samit Chakraborty and DGAP vs. Cloudtail India Pvt. Ltd.
(2022) TaxCorp(IDT) 6567 (NAA)
-
Computation of profiteered amount is an easy mathematical exercise which can be done by any person who has elementary knowledge of accounts.
DGAP vs Godrej Projects Development Pvt. Ltd.
(2022) TaxCorp(IDT) 6561 (NAA)
-
Even a plain reading of the provision does not suggest that the orders need not be signed. At the least, the revenue should have appended digital signatures as it has grave implications for the assessee.
Railsys Engineers Pvt Ltd vs. The Additional Commr. of CGST
(2022) TaxCorp(IDT) 6554 (HC-DELHI)
-
Revenue is directed to invest the money in an interest-bearing fixed deposit maintained with a nationalized bank and issue SCN to assesses, and after considering the replies, pass a speaking order.
Sun Flame Trading Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. vs. Commissioner Central Excise and Central GST Commissionerate, Delhi South
(2022) TaxCorp(IDT) 6553 (HC-DELHI)
-
Tax invoice based on which goods were dispatched from Telangana to Rail Coach Factory, Raebareli, UP was dated February 26, 2018 and was issued in compliance with Rule 46.
HBL Power Systems Ltd. vs State Of U.P
(2022) TaxCorp(IDT) 6552 (HC-ALLAHABAD)
-
Where the trial will take its own time to conclude, the Commissioner is empowered to recover the due amount and propose for abating the proceedings.
Paras Jain vs UOI
(2022) TaxCorp(IDT) 6551 (HC-ALLAHABAD)
-
When the sole cause of action for initiating the proceedings against the Assessee and passing of the impugned adjudication orders doesn’t survive, such matters should be remitted to the adjudicating for fresh consideration.
Sarang Steel vs. State of Jharkhand & Ors
(2022) TaxCorp(IDT) 6550 (HC-JHARKHAND)
-
Vessel support services provided in relation to foreign vessels sailing to countries outside India falls under Export of Services u/s 2(6) of IGST Act as place of supply in such cases is entirely outside India.
In the matter of NSK ship management
(2022) TaxCorp(IDT) 6546 (AAR)
-
Matters concerning Place of Supply in High Sea Sale is not covered by section 97(2) of the CGST Act, 2017 and hence, falls outside the purview of AAR.
In the matter of Coperion Ideal Pvt. Ltd.
(2022) TaxCorp(IDT) 6545 (AAR)
-
Supply of telecommunication services by Vodafone Idea Ltd. to local authority for use by GHMC employees for general office and administrative purposes, do not qualify for exemption under Sr. No. 3 of Notification No. 12/2017 and hence, taxable u/s 9 of CGST Act.
In the matter of Vodafone Idea Ltd.
(2022) TaxCorp(IDT) 6544 (AAR)
Headnote lines are open to everyone. The full headnote and the judgment text open with a subscription — see plans or sign in.