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 2022 April Day 22 - Friday

TMI e-Newsletters FAQ
Login to see detailed Newsletter

TMI Tax Updates - e-Newsletter
April 22, 2022

Case Laws in this Newsletter:

GST Income Tax Customs Corporate Laws Securities / SEBI Insolvency & Bankruptcy FEMA Service Tax Central Excise CST, VAT & Sales Tax Indian Laws



Highlights / Catch Notes

  • GST:

    Grant of interest / compensation for delayed Refund of unutilized input tax credit - Rate of interest - HC awarded 9% instead of 6% applying the proviso to section 56 - zero rated supply - export of goods - The instant cases have not arisen from any order passed by an Adjudicating Authority or Appellate Authority or Appellate Tribunal or Court and the cases are strictly within the scope of the principal provision of Section 56 and not under the proviso thereof. - The High Court was in error in awarding interest at the rate exceeding 6 per cent in the instant matters. - SC

  • GST:

    Transitional credit - revision of the Form TRAN-1 and Form TRAN-2 - The interest of justice would be served if we allow the petitioner to correct Form TRAN-1 in Writ Petition No. 1609/2019 and to file Form TRAN-2 without prejudice to the rights and contentions of both the parties. The respondents shall consider the issue whether the Form TRAN-1 and other forms that would be filed/corrected by the petitioner can be entertained in accordance with the provisions of section 140 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and Rule 117 (1) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017 or not - HC

  • Income Tax:

    Interest demand u/s 220(2A) - petitioner had delayed in paying the interest under Sections 234A, 234B and 234C - Earlier, the application for waiver of interest was rejected - The Demand Notice under Section 156 of the Act also stipulated that if the petitioner failed to pay the aforesaid amount within the period of thirty days from the date of the service of the Demand Notice, the petitioner will also be liable to pay a simple interest at 1.5% for every month or part of a month from the date commencing after the end of the period of 30 days in accordance with Section 220(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. - As the petitioner failed to pay the amount in time, the petitioner is liable to pay the interest. - HC

  • Income Tax:

    Income accrued in India - Taxability of revenue from sale of software - Royalty - The Cloud services merely facilitate the flow of user data from the front end users through internet to the provider’s system and back. The ld. AO has fallen in error in interpreting it as licensing of the right to use the above Cloud Computing Infrastructure and Software (para 10.5 of the Ld. AO order). Thus the subscription fee is not royalty but merely a consideration for online access of the cloud computing services for process and storage of data or run the applications. - AT

  • Income Tax:

    Treating the interest income as 'income from other sources' - CIT(A) in his order has observed that the assessee submitted profit and loss account and balance sheet only reflecting various assets/sundry creditors and debtors but failed to produce books of accounts or any details to establish the nexus between borrowed fund to such loans and advances. In view of the above, we hold that the ld. CIT(A) has not erred in treating interest income as income from other sources. - Further, CIT(A) has not erred in not granting deduction of expenditure u/s. 57 of the Act, against interest income.- AT

  • Customs:

    Seeking to grant leave to add the container freight station (CFS) and the Shipping Line as party respondents in the contempt petition - the order passed by this Court directing issuance of detention certificate to the Customs which direction was not complied with, though communicated to the Shipping Line - Therefore, the Shipping Line though would have been a third party to the proceedings when the writ petition was heard, on and after they have been issued with the detention certificate, they are precluded from raising a plea that they are third party to the proceedings and alien to the directions issued by this Court, resulting in issuance of the detention certificate. - HC

  • Customs:

    Recovery of refund sanctioned - Validity of Show Cause Notice (SCN) - The petitioners have to submit to the jurisdiction of the respondents by filing suitable reply to the impugned Show Cause Notice. If the petitioners suffer an adverse order, there is a hierarchy of the Appellate Authority under the Customs Act, 1962. Therefore, the petitioners have to work out their remedy before the Authorities under the Act. There is no merit in the present Writ Petition - HC

  • Customs:

    Seeking waiver of demurrage charges in terms of Regulation 6(I) and 6(q) of Handling of Cargo in Customs Areas Regulations, 2009 - it is evident that the Customs Authorities cannot direct waiver of demurrage which can only be done by the Custodian. Moreover, in the present case the decision was given on 6th May, 2019 vide which the fine and penalty were levied upon the petitioner. Admittedly, despite the aforesaid decision, the petitioner has not paid the penalty on the pretext that he would pay the same simultaneous to the release of goods. - The appellant is thus, not entitled to waiver of demurrage charges - HC

  • Customs:

    Recovery of differential duty - Levy of penalty u/s 112 and section 114AA of Customs Act, 1962 - Confiscation of used Cranes - Reliance on statements alone is too fragile a foundation to build a case of undervaluation; such depositions are reliable only with corroborative support. In the absence of corroboration, test of cross-examination is of essence, as mandated by section 138B of Customs Act, 1962, for relevancy.- AT

  • Indian Laws:

    Dishonor of Cheque - insufficiency of funds - acquittal of the accused - burden to prove - It is settled law that if the view as taken by learned trial court is a reasonably possible view, in that case, the appellate court should not disturb it just because it feels that another view of the matter is possible. It is equally settled that an order of acquittal will have to be disturbed if it is perverse. - HC

  • Indian Laws:

    Dishonor of Cheque - party to the transaction or not - specific stand taken by the petitioners is that they were not the partners of the firm even at the time of borrowal of loan and at the time of issuance of cheques - In the case on hand admittedly the petitioners were resigned from the first accused partnership firm as early as on 01.04.2014 and as such they are not liable to be punished for the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. - HC

  • Indian Laws:

    Dishonor of Cheque - Just because there is a change in the person who hold the post of Manager, it cannot be stated that the present Manager is not the authorised person to represent the authorised Firm - Neither the appellant-Firm nor PW1 has disputed about the power given to him to represent the Firm. In this background of facts, it cannot be claimed that the respondent/accused had discharged his reverse burden and refuted the initial presumption that has been drawn in favour of the appellant. - HC

  • IBC:

    Delay in implementation of the Resolution Plan - the Appellant is an assignee who is born only after order was passed by the NCLAT on 04.03.2021 by virtue of assignment taken by it on 23rd April, 2021 for an amount of ₹ 255 Crore. - The Appellant who is born only on 23rd April, 2021 i.e., after the Order of the Adjudicating Authority want to push the Corporate Debtor to the Liquidation to realize its dues to the maximum, cannot be the reason for allowing the Application filed by the Appellant for liquidation and Adjudicating Authority after taking into consideration entire facts and circumstances did not commit any error in giving five days further time to the SRA to deposit the amount in the Account of the Corporate Debtor which Corporate Debtor did - AT

  • SEBI:

    Insider trading - Whether existed a close relationship/immediate relation between the appellants? - There is no material on record for the WTM and the SAT to arrive at the finding that both late P.C. Gupta and the appellant Balram Garg communicated the UPSI to the other appellants. The said appellants were not “immediate relatives” and were completely financially independent of the appellant Balram Garg and had nothing to do with the him in any decision making process relating to securities or even otherwise. - SC

  • Service Tax:

    Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019 - SVLDRS - voluntary disclosure - If in a situation where the amount estimated by the designated committee is in excess of the amount declared by the declarant, an opportunity of hearing is required to be given by the designated committee to the declarant, then it would be in complete defiance of logic and contrary to the very object of the scheme to outrightly reject a declaration on the ground of ineligibility without affording an opportunity to the declarant to explain as to why his declaration should be accepted and relief under the scheme should be extended to him. - HC

  • Service Tax:

    Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019 - SVLDRS - the petitioner paid the amount on the last date by debiting the amount electronically from his bank account. However, after the amount was debited from the petitioner's bank account, it was re-credited back due to technical glitches. - There is no justification in not accepting the declaration of the petitioner under the scheme or in not accepting the payment by the petitioner belatedly. - HC

  • Service Tax:

    SEZ unit - refund of service tax - rejection of refund on the ground of period of limitation - last date being public holiday - on examination of the English calendar of the year 2018 in the open Court vis-a-vis Annexure-I, it could be noticed that 28th & 29th April, 2018 were weekends and 30.04.2018 was a Government holiday on account of Buddha Purnima. This being the facts on record, learned Commissioner (Appeals) order rejecting the refund solely on the ground that it is hit by the period of limitation is unsustainable and the same is required to be set aside. - AT

  • Central Excise:

    Extended period of limitation - There is nothing to indicate that the appellant revenue doubted the bona fides of the respondent assessee. In such circumstances extended period of limitation could never have been invoked in the assessee’s case. Thus, if Section 11A of the Act could not have been invoked, the question of imposing penalty or levying interest also does not arise. - HC

  • Central Excise:

    Refund claim - SEZ unit - the petroleum product i.e., High Speed Diesel (HSD) being a non-cenvatable goods for which the supplier had raised commercial invoices wherein duty element was not explicitly mentioned, the payment of duty itself was disputed. - the supplier is not a private party, but a Public Sector Undertaking. The certificate issued by the said supplier, clearly indicated that the product supplied by them to the appellant was duty paid. - the payment of duty thereof stands proved and hence, rejection cannot be made only for want of proof regarding payment of duty - AT

  • VAT:

    Works contract service - zero rated supply - deemed sale or not - Section 2(39) uses the expression “includes”. But what has been brought within the inclusive definition of sales or the types of transactions enumerated in Clauses (a) to (e) above. This becomes clear on reading the provision further i.e. after Clause (e) which uses the words “and such”. By use of the words “and such” would mean that such of the transfers, delivery of goods, transfer of right to use goods, supply or service or supply of goods, as mentioned in Clauses (a) to (e) alone can be treated to be the inclusive part of the definition of “sale” as defined under Section 2(39) of the Act. - A deemed sale cannot be interpreted to be a sale “simpliciter” unless the definition of “sale” in that particular statute provides for. - HC


Notifications


Circulars / Instructions / Orders


News


Case Laws:

  • GST

  • 2022 (4) TMI 980
  • 2022 (4) TMI 979
  • 2022 (4) TMI 978
  • 2022 (4) TMI 977
  • 2022 (4) TMI 976
  • Income Tax

  • 2022 (4) TMI 972
  • 2022 (4) TMI 971
  • 2022 (4) TMI 970
  • 2022 (4) TMI 969
  • 2022 (4) TMI 975
  • 2022 (4) TMI 968
  • 2022 (4) TMI 967
  • 2022 (4) TMI 966
  • 2022 (4) TMI 974
  • 2022 (4) TMI 965
  • 2022 (4) TMI 964
  • 2022 (4) TMI 973
  • 2022 (4) TMI 963
  • 2022 (4) TMI 962
  • 2022 (4) TMI 961
  • 2022 (4) TMI 960
  • 2022 (4) TMI 959
  • 2022 (4) TMI 958
  • 2022 (4) TMI 957
  • 2022 (4) TMI 956
  • 2022 (4) TMI 955
  • 2022 (4) TMI 954
  • 2022 (4) TMI 953
  • Customs

  • 2022 (4) TMI 949
  • 2022 (4) TMI 952
  • 2022 (4) TMI 948
  • 2022 (4) TMI 951
  • 2022 (4) TMI 950
  • 2022 (4) TMI 920
  • Corporate Laws

  • 2022 (4) TMI 947
  • 2022 (4) TMI 946
  • Securities / SEBI

  • 2022 (4) TMI 945
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy

  • 2022 (4) TMI 944
  • 2022 (4) TMI 943
  • 2022 (4) TMI 942
  • 2022 (4) TMI 941
  • 2022 (4) TMI 940
  • 2022 (4) TMI 939
  • 2022 (4) TMI 938
  • FEMA

  • 2022 (4) TMI 937
  • Service Tax

  • 2022 (4) TMI 934
  • 2022 (4) TMI 936
  • 2022 (4) TMI 935
  • 2022 (4) TMI 933
  • Central Excise

  • 2022 (4) TMI 931
  • 2022 (4) TMI 930
  • 2022 (4) TMI 932
  • 2022 (4) TMI 929
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax

  • 2022 (4) TMI 928
  • Indian Laws

  • 2022 (4) TMI 981
  • 2022 (4) TMI 927
  • 2022 (4) TMI 926
  • 2022 (4) TMI 925
  • 2022 (4) TMI 924
  • 2022 (4) TMI 923
  • 2022 (4) TMI 922
  • 2022 (4) TMI 921
 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates