Indirect Tax Weekly Flashback: 10 To 16 November 2024.
Table of Contents – Indirect Tax Weekly Flashback
Delhi High court
Delhi High court Directs Customs Dept. To Return Vanuatu Citizen’s Luxury Watch Seized Without S. 24 Notice
Case Title: Ms Shubhangi Gupta Versus Commissioner Of Customs & Ors.
The Delhi High court has directed the customs department to return Republic of Vanuatu citizen’s luxury watch seized without notice under section 24 of the Customs Act.
Not Necessary For Custom Broker To Keep Continuous Surveillance At Exporter’s Physical Address; Delhi High Court Quashes Order Revoking Customs Broker Licence
Case Title: Commissioner Of Customs (Airport And General) New Delhi Versus M/S Shakti Cargo Movers
The Delhi High Court has quashed the order revoking the customs broker’s licence and held that it is not necessary for the custom broker to keep continuous surveillance at the exporter’s physical address.
Bombay High Court
Bombay High Court Directs DGFT To Pay Cost Of Rs. 50,000 To L&T: Know Why?
Case Title: Larsen & Toubro Limited Versus The Union of India
The Bombay High Court has directed the Directorate Of Foreign Trade (DGFT) to pay a cost of Rs. 50,000 to Larsen & Toubro Limited (L&T).
Interest On Delayed IGST Refund Payable From 60 Days After Filing Of Shipping Bill: Bombay High Court
Case Title: Ms. Anita Agarwal Versus UOI
The Bombay High Court has held that the Petitioner is entitled to interest under Section 56 of the CGST Act for the period beginning with the expiry of 60 days from the date of the shipping bill up to the date of grant of IGST refund.
Kerala High Court
Goods Never Cleared For Home Consumption But Were Re-Exported: Kerala High Court Directs Import Duty Refund To Importer
Case Title: Commissioner Of Customs Versus M/S. Hadeed Steels Pvt. Ltd
The Kerala High Court has directed the import duty refund to importer on the grounds that the goods were never cleared for home consumption but were re-exported.
Punjab And Haryana High Court
Rule 8(3) Ultra Vires To Section 11AB(1) Of Central Excise Act, 1944: Punjab And Haryana High Court Directs Dept. To Refund Excessive Interest Along With 6% Interest
Case Title: M/s Durga Board and Paper Industries Limited V/S Union of India and another
The Punjab And Haryana High Court has held that Rule 8(3) ultra vires to section 11AB(1) of Central Excise Act, 1944 and directed the dept. to refund excessive interest along with the 6% interest.
Himachal Pradesh High Court
Himachal Pradesh High Court Upholds GST On Royalty Paid By Mineral Concession Holder For Any Mining Concession Granted By State
Case Title: M/s Lakhwinder Singh Stone Crusher Versus Union of India & ors.
The Himachal Pradesh High Court has upheld the GST on royalty paid by mineral concession holders for any mining concession granted by state.
CESTAT
No Service Tax Demand Can Be Confirmed Under Head Not Alleged In Show Cause Notice: CESTAT
Case Title: M/s. Info Edge (India) Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Service Tax
The Delhi Bench of Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has held that no service tax demand can be confirmed under a head not alleged in the show cause notice.
No Service Tax Payable On Consideration Received On Execution Of Licence Agreement: CESTAT
Case Title: M/s Tripti Alcobrew Pvt. Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Central Excise & CGST
The Delhi Bench of Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has held that no service tax payable on consideration received on execution of licence agreement.
Customs Dept’s Re-Determination Of Classification Of Imported ECU Not Legal: CESTAT
Case Title: Hyundai Motors India Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Customs
The Chennai Bench of Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has held that the customs department’s re-determination of classification of the imported Computer & Bracket Assembly/Electronic Control Unit (ECU) was not legal and proper.
Hyundai Eligible For Concessional Rate Benefit Of BCD, Based On COO Certificate As Per FTA: CESTAT
Case Title: Hyundai Motors India Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Customs
The Chennai Bench of Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has held that Hyundai is eligible for benefit of concessional rate of Basic Customs Duty (BCD), based on the Country of Origin (COO) Certificate as per a Bilateral Free-Trade Agreements (FTA), even after re-classification and hence no demand of duty is sustainable.
