Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram
Tax Updates - TMI e-Newsletters

Home e-Newsletters Index Year 2021 April Day 10 - Saturday

TMI e-Newsletters FAQ
You need to Subscribe a package.

Newsletter: Where Service Meets Reader Approval.

TMI Tax Updates - e-Newsletter
April 10, 2021

Case Laws in this Newsletter:

GST Income Tax Customs Insolvency & Bankruptcy Service Tax Central Excise Indian Laws



Highlights / Catch Notes

    GST

  • Refund of the amounts paid during investigation - remittances made by the petitioner during investigation - self- ascertainment - Section 74(5) of GST Act - statement recorded at the time of search admitting GST liability and setting the scheme of instalments have been retracted by the petitioner on 05.11.2019 and the petitioner has consistently and vehemently been contested the liability to tax. With this, the requirement of ‘ascertainment’ under Section 74(5), fails. - The mandamus as sought for by the petitioner is granted. The amount of ₹ 2.00 crores collected shall be refunded to the petitioner within a period of four (4) weeks from today. - HC

  • Income Tax

  • Penalty levied u/s 271(1)(b) - assessee had failed to provide full submissions - penalty levied by the Assessing Officer u/s 271(1)(b) of the IT Act deserves to be cancelled if there are materials to suggest on conclusion of the proceedings before the Assessing Officer; that the Assessing Officer was, on the whole, satisfied with the overall compliances made by the assessee during proceedings before the Assessing Officer - Penalty deleted - AT

  • Assessment u/s 144C(13) - Time limit for completion of assessments and reassessments - Sub-section (13) to Section 144C, in my view, imposes a restriction on the Assessing Officer and denies him the benefit of the more expansive time limit available under Section 153 to pass a final order of assessment as he has to do so within one month from the end of the month when the directions of the DRP are received by him, even without hearing the assessee concerned. - the impugned notices issued by the DRP after a period of four years from the date of order of the Tribunal would be barred by limitation - HC

  • Exemption u/s 11 - subsidy received from BCCI - BARODA CRICKET ASSOCIATION - Charitable activities u/s 2(15) - we are not convinced with the case put up by the Revenue. It is not the case of the Revenue that the objects of the Trust are not charitable, but the case of the Revenue is that the activities undertaken by the Association are not charitable in nature. - Irrespective of the nature of the activities of the BCCI (commercial or charitable), what is pertinent for the purpose of determining the nature of the activities of the assessees, is the object and the activities of the assessees and not that of the BCCI. - HC

  • Automatic vacation of a stay as granted on the completion of 365 days - Constitutional validity of the third proviso to Section 254(2A) - It is liable to be struck down as violating Article 14 of the Constitution of India - the third proviso to Section 254(2A) of the Income Tax Act will now be read without the word “even” and the words “is not” after the words “delay in disposing of the appeal”. Any order of stay shall stand vacated after the expiry of the period or periods mentioned in the Section only if the delay in disposing of the appeal is attributable to the assessee - SC

  • Customs

  • Direction to re-assess the goods in Bill of Entry - In this case, the amendment sought for is based on the documents that were available before the import. Since the imported lost goods were never cleared, the petitioner was entitled to have the subject Bill of Entry amended for the purpose of refund under Section 27 of the Customs Act, 1962 subject to other safeguards under Section 27 of the Customs Act,1962. - HC

  • Star Trading House - Seeking clearance of Pigeon Peas for home consumption - In the facts of the present case the RC is binding on the respondents until the completion of the import quota mentioned therein and considering that the petitioner has imported the import item before 31.03.2021, petitioner's import is required to be declared as valid import under the FTP - HC

  • IBC

  • Initiation of CIRP - Flat Buyer is a Financial Creditor or not - Whether ‘HBPL’ falls within the ambit of the definition of ‘Corporate Debtor’, as defined under Section 3(8) of the Code? - ‘HBPL’ is the ‘Corporate Debtor’ and the second Respondent the ‘Financial Creditor’ and the amount involved is the ‘Financial Debt’ as defined under the Code - the asset of the ‘Corporate Debtor Company’ of that particular Project is to be maximized for balancing the Creditor such as ‘Allottees’, ‘Financial Institutions’ and ‘Operational Creditors’ of that particular Project. - AT

  • Service Tax

  • Pre-Show Cause Notice Consultation - it cannot be said that voluntary statements made by the officials of the petitioners before the Senior Intelligence Officer would constitute a pre-show cause notice consultation, as stipulated under paragraph 5 of the 2017 Master Circular - The contesting respondents will serve an appropriate communication on the petitioner indicating therein the date, time and venue at which they intend to convene a meeting for holding pre-show cause notice consultation - HC

  • Central Excise

  • Suppression of production and clandestine removal - bars/ rods - MS Ingots - The order is not discussing any documents of the appellant proving the alleged clandestine removal on part of the appellant. The Adjudicating Authority has merely relied upon the statement of the Director. Resultantly the confirmation of demand is merely based on third party evidence. - Demand set aside - AT

  • Liability of Central Excise Duty - principal manufacturer or job-worker - Territorial Jurisdiction - it is evidently clear that the taxable event i.e. manufacture of the goods in question had taken place in the factory premises of Tigaksha at Una in Himachal Pradesh. Thus, neither respondent No.2 nor respondent No.3 has the territorial jurisdiction to issue any notice to show cause-cum-demand for levy of central excise duty on such products. - HC


Articles


Notifications


Circulars / Instructions / Orders


News


Case Laws:

  • GST

  • 2021 (4) TMI 366
  • 2021 (4) TMI 323
  • 2021 (4) TMI 322
  • Income Tax

  • 2021 (4) TMI 369
  • 2021 (4) TMI 364
  • 2021 (4) TMI 360
  • 2021 (4) TMI 359
  • 2021 (4) TMI 357
  • 2021 (4) TMI 355
  • 2021 (4) TMI 354
  • 2021 (4) TMI 348
  • 2021 (4) TMI 345
  • 2021 (4) TMI 344
  • 2021 (4) TMI 343
  • 2021 (4) TMI 342
  • 2021 (4) TMI 341
  • 2021 (4) TMI 340
  • 2021 (4) TMI 339
  • 2021 (4) TMI 338
  • 2021 (4) TMI 337
  • 2021 (4) TMI 336
  • 2021 (4) TMI 335
  • 2021 (4) TMI 334
  • 2021 (4) TMI 333
  • 2021 (4) TMI 332
  • 2021 (4) TMI 331
  • 2021 (4) TMI 330
  • 2021 (4) TMI 329
  • 2021 (4) TMI 328
  • 2021 (4) TMI 327
  • 2021 (4) TMI 326
  • 2021 (4) TMI 325
  • 2021 (4) TMI 324
  • Customs

  • 2021 (4) TMI 367
  • 2021 (4) TMI 363
  • 2021 (4) TMI 361
  • 2021 (4) TMI 358
  • 2021 (4) TMI 356
  • 2021 (4) TMI 350
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy

  • 2021 (4) TMI 353
  • 2021 (4) TMI 352
  • 2021 (4) TMI 351
  • Service Tax

  • 2021 (4) TMI 365
  • 2021 (4) TMI 349
  • Central Excise

  • 2021 (4) TMI 368
  • 2021 (4) TMI 347
  • 2021 (4) TMI 346
  • 2021 (4) TMI 321
  • Indian Laws

  • 2021 (4) TMI 362
 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates