Indirect Tax Weekly Flashback for the period 13 October 2024 to 19 October 2024.
Table of Contents
Bombay High Court – Indirect Tax Weekly Flashback
Bombay High Court Upholds Suspension Of Warehousing Operation Revocation Citing BISCO Limited Judgement
Case Title: Commissioner of Customs Versus Ganesh Benzoplast Limited
Case No.: Custom Appeal (L) No.28294 Of 2024
The Bombay High Court has upheld the suspension of warehousing operation revocation citing BISCO Limited Judgement.
The bench of Justice M.S. Sonak and Justice Jitendra Jain has observed that in case of BISCO Limited, the Supreme Court noted that the Customs Authorities granted specific permissions to unload the portion of the cargo outside the open space, which was notified as a public bonded warehouse but within the factory premises.
Customs Department Failed To Inform Assessee About Transferring Its Case To The Call Book: Bombay High Court Quashes SCN
Case Title: The Great Eastern Shipping Company Ltd. v/s Union of India
Case No.: Writ Petition No.3605 Of 2024
The Bombay High Court has quashed the Show Cause Notice on the grounds that it is incumbent upon the respondent/customs department to have informed the petitioner about its case being transferred to the call book, even without reference to the provisions of Section 28(9) of the Customs Act.
The bench of Justice M.S.Sonak and Justice Jitendra Jain has observed that there is a gross delay of over 20 years in adjudication of the show cause notice; no delay can be attributed to the petitioner for the delay.
Kerala High Court – Indirect Tax Weekly Flashback
CENVAT Credit On GTA Services Available Only On Services Availed Up To Place Of Removal: Kerala High Court
Case Title: Transformers And Electricals Kerala Ltd. V/S The Commissioner Of Central Tax And Central Excise Central Revenue Building
Citation: C.E.APPEAL.NO.17 OF 2019
The Kerala High Court has held that the CENVAT credit on GTA services (Goods Transport Agency) being available only in respect of services availed up to the place of removal and not beyond it.
The bench of Justice A.K.Jayasankaran Nambiar and Justice Syam Kumar V.M. has observed that the appellant did not include the transportation costs in the assessable value of the goods for the purposes of payment of Central Excise duty.
Kerala High Court Upholds Rs. 1 Lakh Penalty For Non-Declaration In Form 8FA Under KVAT Act
Case Title: Kiran Jewels (India) V/S State Of Kerala
Case No.: OT.REV NO. 109 OF 2022
The Kerala High Court has upheld the Penalty For Non-Declaration in Form 8FA of Rs. 1 Lakh under Kerala Value Added Tax Act (KVAT Act).
The bench of Justice A.K. Jayasankaran Nambiar and Justice Syam Kumar V.M. has observed that the petitioner/assessee had not covered the consignment that was brought by him from Mumbai to Cochin by a valid Form 8FA declaration as mandated under the Kerala Value Added Tax Rules, the Commercial Tax Authorities in the State were perhaps justified in assuming that but for the detection, the petitioner might have well evaded his tax liability by clandestinely selling the consignment of jewellery within the State of Kerala.
Delhi High Court – Indirect Tax Weekly Flashback
Export Proceeds Realised Within Time As Per FEMA, Exporter Entitled For Duty Drawback: Delhi High Court Directs Defreezing Of Bank Account
Case Title: M/S Innovative Crafts Versus Union Of India
Case No.: W.P.(C) 14232/2022 & CM APPLs. 43462/2022, 45597/2022
The Delhi High Court has held that since export proceeds have been realized within the stipulated period as prescribed in Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999 (FEMA), the exporter entitled for duty drawback and there is no justification for freezing of the bank account of the exporter.
Madras High Court – Indirect Tax Weekly Flashback
VAT | Assessment Proceedings Can’t Be Considered Time Barred As Revision Notice Issued In Time: Madras High Court
Case Title: The Appellate Assistant Commissioner (CT) Versus M/s.Supreme Coaters & Fabricators
Case No.: T.C.(Revision) Nos.41 to 43 of 2016 and C.M.P.Nos.14217 to 14219 of 2016
The Madras High Court has held that assessment proceedings cannot be considered time barred as revision notice issued in time.
The bench of Justice R.Suresh Kumar and Justice C.Saravanan has observed that since notices were issued on 05.03.2011 i.e., within three years contemplated under Section 24(5) of the Puducherry Value Added Tax Act, 2007 (PVAT Act 2007), the assessment orders passed on 12.12.2014, 22.12.2014 and 31.12.2014 are held to have been passed in time.
Notifications – Indirect Tax Weekly Flashback
CBIC Clarifies On Retrospective Extension Of Time Limit To Avail GST ITC
F. No. CBIC-20001/6/2024-GST
The Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs (CBIC) issued a Clarification on retrospective extension of Time Limit to avail GST ITC.
Section 118 of the Finance (No. 2) Act, 2024 was inserted by which the time limit to avail input tax credit under provisions of sub-section (4) of section 16 of CGST Act has been retrospectively extended in certain specified cases.
Amnesty Scheme | CBIC Issues Clarification On Waiver Of Interest Or Penalty On Demands Pertaining To FYs 2017-20
Circular No. 238/32/2024-GST
Amnesty Scheme – The Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs (CBIC) has issued the clarification on interest and penalty or both in respect of demands under section 73 of the CGST Act pertaining to Financial Years 2017-18, 2018-19 and 2019-20.
