-
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)
-
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)
Headnote lines are open to everyone. The full headnote and the judgment text open with a subscription — see plans or sign in.