TMI Tax Updates - e-Newsletter
April 22, 2023
Case Laws in this Newsletter:
GST
Income Tax
Customs
Insolvency & Bankruptcy
FEMA
Service Tax
Central Excise
CST, VAT & Sales Tax
Highlights / Catch Notes
-
GST:
Refund claim on account of Input Tax Credit accumulated due to Inverted Tax Structure - petitioner failed to submit the books and, as such, the amount of refund to be sanctioned could not be determined without proper verification of books of account - As per the revenue, only a small portion is disputed and is to be adjudicated - Revenue directed to release / refund the balance amount as per law - HC
-
GST:
Levy of penalty under sub-section (3) of Section 129 of GST Act - In the invoice accompanying the goods, the tax paid was shown to be under CGST & SGST, whereas it should have been shown as tax paid towards IGST - If the officer finds that the amount has been correctly shown as IGST in the monthly returns filed for the month of July 2022, notwithstanding the issuance of Ext.P13 order, the officer shall consider whether the mistake committed by the petitioner can be penalized by imposing a minor penalty. - HC
-
Income Tax:
Scrutiny by the High Court in an appeal u/s 260A for Determination of the arm’s length price made by the Tribunal - When the determination of the arm’s length price is challenged before the High Court, it is always open for the High Court to consider and examine whether the arm’s length price has been determined while taking into consideration the relevant guidelines under the Act and the Rules. - Matters restored back to HC - SC
-
Income Tax:
TDS u/s 194I or not - Wrong section applied by the AO - withhold tax (TDS) on External Development Charges (‘EDC’) paid to Haryana Urban Development Authority (‘HUDA’) - Revenue appears to be approaching the issue from quite the reverse direction; it has for an inexplicable reason, concluded that assessees ought to deduct TDS from EDC and now seeks to find provisions of law to sustain the said conclusion. - Approach of the Revenue is flawed - HC
-
Income Tax:
Assessment of capital gains on sale of agricultural land or landed property - the assessee’s case clearly falls under clause (b)(ii) to provisions of section 2(14)(iii) reason being assessee’s land is outside Hindupur Municipal limits at a distance of 4 kms measured aerially and as per provisional report of Census of India, population of Hindupur Municipality in 2011 is 151677. Hence, the AO has rightly charged assessee’s land to capital gain tax and the CIT(A) has rightly affirmed the same. - AT
-
Income Tax:
Deduction u/s 80G - trust had made expenses more than 5% of its total receipts - assessee has submitted that during the year under consideration, the religious expenses/poojari expenses were only to the tune of 1.67% of the total income and CIT(Exemption), Ahmedabad has taken an incorrect figure of “total income” for working out the percentage of religious/Poojari expenses - Matter restored back - AT
-
Income Tax:
Additions towards Undisclosed contract receipt - The revenue authority failed to find out any fault in this submission. They simply rejected. It is to be demonstrated from the details that the assessee has received the complete money and failed to offer income of the differential amount. - Additions deleted - AT
-
Income Tax:
Income accrued in India - Service desk provided by the assessee to the employees of Tower Watson to monitor the IT related glitch - - services provided by the assessee is separate and it only collected the related cost to maintain the service desk. Therefore, it is a receipt which will fall under the Article 7 of the treaty. Hence, the addition proposed and sustained by the Ld.DRP are beyond the scope and accordingly Assessing Officer is directed to delete the same. - AT
-
Income Tax:
Addition u/s 56(2)(vii)(b)(i) - difference between the actual purchase consideration of plots of land and market value as per stamp valuation authorities - Assessee has not demonstrated before us that whether he fulfils the criteria for treating the purchase of three plots as a stock in trade of his business. Merely presumption by the assessee that those three plots were intended for further sale and therefore those were stock in trade, is not sufficient and it has to be proved by way of evidences, which the assessee has failed - AT
-
Income Tax:
TDS u/s 195 - site testing charges - Royalty - the services which can independently or on stand alone basis, be provided, coupled with the fulfillment of the other requirement of Para 4(b) of the DTAA would only attract the ‘Fee for included services' - In the present case, the services, which are the subject matter of the dispute, do not fall under “Fee for incidental services”, hence, would not fall under Royalty and as such, not chargeable in India as per Clause 12 of DTAA - AT
-
Customs:
Scope of the investigation - involvement of high-ranking political functionaries of the State - The Customs as well as the Enforcement Directorate, have conducted or are conducting proper investigations. There are also no reasons to assume that if the involvement of any person is revealed in the investigation, they will not be proceeded against. For, the dictum “Be you ever so high, the law is above you” applies with equal vigour to all, irrespective of status or position. - HC
-
Customs:
Rejection of request of the IOC for conversion of DEEC Shipping Bills to Drawback Scheme - Delay between 6 months to 1 year - Period of limitation - If the request / application seeking conversion is made within a specified period, it would enable the department to verify the claim diligently and promptly as also the availability of the documents. - The appeal filed by the Appellant was barred by time and was rightly rejected by the competent authority - AT
-
Customs:
Levy of penalty u/s 112(b)(ii) of the Customs Act, 1962 - Past offence can be at best enhancer of civil and/or criminal liabilities, but no penalty can be imposed on any concurrent alleged offence. It is well settled law that no penalty under section 112(b)(ii) of the Customs Act, 1962, can be imposed without proving the nexus with the goods under seizure which are liable for confiscation. - AT
-
IBC:
CIRP - Service of notice when admitted claim of Operational Creditors is 10% - It is held that it is incumbent upon the RP to serve notice of each meeting of the CoC to the Operational Creditors or their representatives if the amount of the aggregated due is not less than 10% of the debt. Since, in this case, it is found that no notice was given by the RP to the Operational Creditors, therefore, it is a dereliction of duty on his part for which he deserves to be burdened with costs. The cost is assessed at Rs. 1 Lakh which shall be paid by the RP to the Operational Creditors (Appellants), - AT
-
Service Tax:
Levy of penalty - Since the appellant have admittedly paid service tax along with interest and moreover, they were otherwise entitled for the Cenvat credit for the service tax they have paid, in a routine course, no malafide intention can be attributed to the appellant, therefore invoking Section 80, in the facts and circumstance of the case, the penalty is not imposable - AT
-
Central Excise:
Clandestine manufacture of labelled and unlabelled biris - The burden to establish the factum of clandestine clearance is upon the revenue and required to be established beyond all reasonable doubt and mere suspicion or sole entries in certain records whose authenticity itself is under challenge cannot be the singular yardstick to uphold such a contention. - AT
Articles
Notifications
Customs-
31/2023 - dated
20-4-2023
-
Cus
Export duty exemption to specified varieties of Rice subject to the prescribed condition(s) - Goods meant for export to Nepal, when exported through the customs station - Seeks to further amend notification No. 55/2022 - Customs, dated 31.10.2022, in order to substitute the word “Sonauli or Nepalgunj Road” for the word “Sonauli”.
-
29/2023 - dated
20-4-2023
-
Cus (NT)
Rate of exchange of one unit of foreign currency equivalent to Indian rupees - Supersession of the Notification No. 26/2023-Customs(N.T.), dated 6th April, 2023
GST - States-
104264/2023/01(120)/XXVII(8)/2022/CTR-12(2022) - dated
6-3-2023
-
Uttarakhand SGST
Amendments in the notification of the Government of Uttarakhand, Finance Section-8, No.514 /2017 /9(120)/XXVII(8)/ 2017 dated the 29th June 2017
-
104263/2023/01(120)/XXVII(8)/2022/CTR-13(2022) - dated
6-3-2023
-
Uttarakhand SGST
Amendments in the Notification of the Government of Uttarakhand, Finance Section-8, No. 518/2017/9(120)XXVII(8)/2017 dated the 29th June, 2017
-
104258/2023/01(120)/XXVII(8)/2022/CTR-14(2022) - dated
6-3-2023
-
Uttarakhand SGST
Amendment in Notification No. 526/2017/9(120)XXVII(8)/2017 dated the 29th June, 2017
-
104204/2023/01(120)/XXVII(8)/2022/CTR-15(2022) - dated
6-3-2023
-
Uttarakhand SGST
Amendments further to amend the notification of the Government of Uttarakhand, Finance Section-8, No. 530/2017/9(120)XXVII(8)/2017 dated the 29th June, 2017
Circulars / Instructions / Orders
News
Case Laws:
-
GST
-
2023 (4) TMI 864
Refund claim on account of Input Tax Credit accumulated due to Inverted Tax Structure - petitioner failed to submit the books and, as such, the amount of refund to be sanctioned could not be determined without proper verification of books of account - HELD THAT:- On perusal of the statutory provisions and the circular governing the field, it is made clear that in order to get refund as per formula given under Rule- 89(5), the petitioner has to adhere to the said provisions. The prayer for refund has not been taken into consideration in proper perspective while passing the order impugned on the plea that the petitioner had not produced the relevant documents. What the petitioner had to submit that has already been mentioned in the provisions of the Act and Rules and CBIC guidelines. Had the petitioner adhered to the same, no new plea would have been taken at this stage contending that since the petitioner had not produced books of accounts, it is not entitled to get refund of the amount. The petitioner was issued with a show-cause notice in RFD-08 on 28.06.2022 for production of books of account, i.e., input wise details of spare parts used during the assembling/manufacturing process of e-vehicles in order to ascertain the amount of inputs used during the assembling/manufacturing of e-vehicles only and fixing the date for personal hearing to 13.07.2022. The petitioner replied to the show-cause notice on 06.07.2022 and submitted the documents, as mentioned at serial no. (a) to (i) in the said paragraph, but the petitioner failed to submit the input wise details of spare parts used during the assembling/ manufacturing process of e-vehicles. Therefore, no illegality or irregularity has been committed by the authority in rejecting the refund application of the petitioner. It is admitted on the part of the opposite parties that the dispute is with regard to refund of Rs.5,18,230/-, which requires proper adjudication by the authority on production of documents, as claimed by the opposite parties. Therefore, excluding Rs.5,18,230/-, out of Rs.2,22,97,228/-, the balance amount has to be refunded to the petitioner. If any further amount is found to be refundable, the same can be paid after final adjudication. This Court directs the opposite parties to refund the balance amount, excluding Rs.5,18,230/- from out of total amount of Rs.2,22,97,228/-, to the petitioner pending final adjudication of the disputed amount in accordance with law - Petition disposed off.
-
2023 (4) TMI 863
Direction to pay/release the GST amount alongwith the interest for delay at the standard rate of interest at 18% - HELD THAT:- The contention of petitioner's counsel is that he is ready to complete the formalities whereupon the concerned opposite party may consider the refund/release of G.S.T. amount. The petitioner may complete the formalities and remove the deficiencies, if any, seeking refund of G.S.T. within fifteen days, whereupon, if it is otherwise permissible under law and there is no legal impediment in this regard, the opposite parties shall proceed to consider the claim of the petitioner for refund and take a decision thereon within six weeks. Petitioner may claim interest also, if otherwise permissible and a decision be taken in this regard also. The writ petition is disposed off.
-
2023 (4) TMI 862
Cancellation of GST registration of petitioner - failure to adhere to the time limit specified under sub-section (1) of Section 30 of the said Act - HELD THAT:- The petitioner approached this court against the affirmation of the order of cancellation of registration by the Appellate Authority. The petitioner had failed to comply with the provisions of Section 29 (2) (b) (c) of the CGST Act. However, it appears that C.B.I.C on the recommendation of GST Council in its 49th Meeting dated 18.02.2023, has issued the Notification No. 3/2023-Central Tax dated 31.03.2023 in the Extra Ordinary Gazette. Apparently, notification appears to be beneficial in nature as it provides a window of opportunity to all such registered persons whose registration were cancelled for non-compliance of the provisions of Section 29(2) (b) and (c) of CGST Act, 2017. Such registered persons may apply for revocation of cancellation of registration up to 30th June 2023, subject to filing of returns due upto the effective date of cancellation of registration and payment of any amount due as tax along with interest, penalty and late fee in respect of such returns. It is also made clear that no further extension of time period for filing application for revocation of cancellation of registration shall be available in such cases - The petitioner falls in the category of cases where the appeal preferred against the cancellation of GST registration has been rejected under Section 107(1) and (4) of CGST Act as time barred. However, since the provision is beneficial in nature and appears to ameliorate the difficulty faced by such registered persons whose GST registration stood cancelled, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the petitioner to approach the proper officer with an application for revocation of cancellation of registration by 30th June 2023, as per the Notification dated 31.03.2023 after complying with the conditions prescribed thereunder. Petition disposed off.
-
2023 (4) TMI 861
Legislative competence of the State Legislature and contrary to Section 19 of CAA 2016 - Constitution (101st Amendment) Act, 2016 (CAA) - Demand / Recovery of VAT after implementation of GST - Scope of saving clause under the GST Act - right or a vested right or accrued right to proceed to reopen assessments for enforcing the legal obligation/liability arising before 16.09.2016 or not - Section 174(2) of the KSGST Act - HELD THAT:- The very same points arise in the instant batch of appeals. Hence, by adopting the reasoning, conclusion and observation recorded in SHEEN GOLDEN JEWELS [ 2022 (12) TMI 1137 - KERALA HIGH COURT ], the appeals stand dismissed.
-
2023 (4) TMI 860
Levy of penalty under sub-section (3) of Section 129 of GST Act - In the invoice accompanying the goods, the tax paid was shown to be under CGST SGST, whereas it should have been shown as tax paid towards IGST - HELD THAT:- There will be an interim order directing the 1st respondent to verify monthly returns filed by the petitioner for the month of July 2022 and determine whether the amount in question was correctly shown as IGST instead of CGST/SGST. If the officer finds that the amount has been correctly shown as IGST in the monthly returns filed for the month of July 2022, notwithstanding the issuance of Ext.P13 order, the officer shall consider whether the mistake committed by the petitioner can be penalized by imposing a minor penalty. Let orders be passed by the 1st respondent as directed above on or before 25-08-2022. The petitioner shall produce a copy of the returns for the month of July 2022 before the 1st respondent.
-
Income Tax
-
2023 (4) TMI 859
Scrutiny by the High Court in an appeal u/s 260A for Determination of the arm s length price made by the Tribunal - whether in every case where the Tribunal determines the arm s length price, the same shall attain finality and the High Court is precluded from considering the determination of the arm s length price determined by the Tribunal, in exercise of powers under Section 260A? - HELD THAT:- There cannot be any absolute proposition of law that in all cases where the Tribunal has determined the arm s length price the same is final and cannot be the subject matter of scrutiny by the High Court in an appeal u/s 260A - When the determination of the arm s length price is challenged before the High Court, it is always open for the High Court to consider and examine whether the arm s length price has been determined while taking into consideration the relevant guidelines under the Act and the Rules. High Court can also examine whether the comparable transactions have been taken into consideration properly or not, i.e., to the extent non- comparable transactions are considered as comparable transactions or not. Therefore, the view taken by the Karnataka High Court in the case of Softbrands India (P) Ltd. [ 2018 (6) TMI 1327 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT] that in the transfer pricing matters, the determination of the arm s length price by the Tribunal is final and cannot be subject matter of scrutiny under Section 260A of the IT Act cannot be accepted. As observed within the parameters of Section 260A of the IT Act in an appeal challenging the determination of the arm s length price, it is always open for the High Court to examine in each case whether while determining the arm s length price, the guidelines laid down under the Act and the Rules, referred to hereinabove, are followed or not and whether the determination of the arm s length price and the findings recorded by the Tribunal while determining the arm s length price are perverse or not. The impugned judgments and orders passed by the High Court dismissing the Revenue s appeals and even the appeals preferred by the assessees are required to be quashed and set aside and the matters are required to be remitted back to the concerned High Courts to decide and dispose of the respective appeals afresh.
-
2023 (4) TMI 857
Revision u/s 263 - tribunal justification in sustaining the order of CIT - Whether tribunal was justified in sustaining the order of the CIT when the assessing officer completed the assessment after making necessary enquiries and verifications? - Whether there were materials before the appellate tribunal to believe that the view taken by the assessing officer is unsustainable in law and is erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the revenue? - HELD THAT:- Question nos. (i), (ii) and (iii) are covered by the Full Bench order [ 2022 (10) TMI 851 - KERALA HIGH COURT] Hence, the questions are answered in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue for statistical purposes and the matter is remitted to the Assessing Officer for assessment afresh by keeping in view the order of the Full Bench. Setoff of loss sustained by the rubber sheet factory - whether was in the course of a business activity and ought to have been set off against the business income without applying the provisions of Rule 7A? - HELD THAT:- By following the reasoning, consideration and remand of question No.(iii) in [ 2022 (10) TMI 851 - KERALA HIGH COURT] question No.(iv) in the instant appeal is answered in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue for statistical purposes and the matter is remitted to the Assessing Officer for consideration and disposal afresh.
-
2023 (4) TMI 856
Belated employees contribution of ESI PF under respective statutes - HELD THAT:- We noted that this issue is now settled by the decision of M/s. Checkmate Services P.Ltd [ 2022 (10) TMI 617 - SUPREME COURT] Admittedly, these payments are made beyond due dates as prescribed under respective statues, which is not disputed by the assessee s counsel. Hence, we dismiss this issue of assessee s appeal. Assessment of capital gains on sale of agricultural land or landed property - Nature of land sold - Calculation of distance to get jurisdiction of municipality - as per section 2(14)(iii)(a) the village population is to be considered for ascertaining whether the land is capital asset or not - whether clause (a) or clause (b) to section 2(14)(iii) will apply to the present dispute? - HELD THAT:- Interpretation of provisions of section 2(14)(iii) sub-clause (a) clearly applies, in case where land falls in any area which comprised within the jurisdiction of municipality and which has population of not less than ten thousand. Hence, in the present case meaning of clause (a) to section 2(14)(iii), agricultural land in India, not being land situated within jurisdiction of municipality and which municipality has population of not less than ten thousand is to be read together. In the present case, as argued by the Sr.DR, the assessee s case clearly falls under clause (b)(ii) to provisions of section 2(14)(iii) reason being assessee s land is outside Hindupur Municipal limits at a distance of 4 kms measured aerially and as per provisional report of Census of India, population of Hindupur Municipality in 2011 is 151677. Hence, the AO has rightly charged assessee s land to capital gain tax and the CIT(A) has rightly affirmed the same. Decided against assessee.
-
2023 (4) TMI 855
Assessment u/s 153A - assessment in the case of unabated years - incriminating materials found during search or not? - unexplained investment u/s 69 - HELD THAT:- The word 'assess' in Section 153A/153C of the Act is relatable to abated proceedings (i.e. those pending on the date of search) and the word 'reassess' to the completed assessment proceedings. In the case of Saumya Construction Pvt. Ltd. [ 2016 (7) TMI 911 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT] has held that there cannot be any addition of regular items shown in the books of accounts until and unless there were certain materials of incriminating nature found during search. The word incriminating has not been defined under the Act, but it refers to materials/ documents/ information which were collected during the search proceedings and not produced in the original assessment proceeding. Simultaneously, these documents had bearing on the total income of the assessee. Now coming to the case, we note that addition was made based on the amount credited in the bank account of the assessee without referring to incriminating document found in this regard which would have made basis for the addition in the assessment. CIT(A) has also given clear finding that the entries in the bank statement which were the basis for making addition, have already been reported in the return of income filed under section 139 of the Act. There was no other material referred to by the AO while making the addition of credit entries in the bank account. We hold that there cannot be any addition to the total income of the assessee of the regular items as made by the AO in the present case. Accordingly, we do not find any infirmity in the order of the learned CIT (A). Hence, we uphold the same. Thus, the grounds of appeal of the Revenue are hereby dismissed. Addition being unaccounted receipt on account of noting/ jotting on loose paper/pocket diary etc. - CIT(A) held that pages of seized document are either dumb document or non-speaking one and worked out the amount of the receipts or payment from such pages - HELD THAT:- We find that the learned CIT(A) worked out the amount of unaccounted receipt or payment based on admission by the assessee either in the statement recorded during the search or in the submission made during assessment or appellate proceeding and based on analysis of seized document which has not been controverted. No infirmity in the order of the learned CIT(A). Nevertheless, we find that the sum has been added twice i.e. in the AY 2014-15 and 2016-17 which is not desirable under the provisions of the Act. Thus, we delete the above addition from the AY 2014-15. Hence, the grounds of appeal of the assessee and Revenue for the AY 2013-14 and 2015-16 are dismissed whereas the ground of appeal of the assessee for the AY 2014-15 is partly allowed. Addition on account of unexplained credit entries in bank - It is the primary onus upon the assessee to justify the test provided under section 68 of the Act i.e. identity, credit worthiness of the parties but the assessee instead of providing the same requested to the Revenue to conduct the enquiries. Thus, it appears that the assessee has failed to discharge the onus imposed upon it under section 68 of the Act. However, considering the submission of the assessee that the loan party is not providing the information, we interest of the justice and fair play deemed it fit to restore the issue to the file of the AO for fresh adjudication after conducting necessary enquiries from the loan party. Hence, the ground of appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Unexplained cash based on the seized material found on the premises of the assessee without considering provisions of section 132(4A) - As in the absence of any corroborative material, the information contained in the seized document cannot be treated as incriminating material suggesting any income in the hands of the assessee. As such these documents are dumped documents and based on the same no addition can be sustained. Nevertheless, the director namely Shri Ashit Haribhai Vora has categorically denied by furnishing the affidavit to have made any payment of commission to the assessee. The contents of the affidavit were not controverted by the AO during the remand proceedings. On this count as well, the addition made by the AO is not sustainable. Moving further, CIT-A in his order has also observed that the due process of the provisions of section 153C was not adopted by the AO in the given set of facts and therefore for that reason as well the Ld. CIT-A was pleased to delete the addition made by the AO. The finding of the Ld. CIT-A was based on the order of this tribunal in the case of Rajesh Sundardas Vaswani and others [ 2020 (11) TMI 482 - ITAT AHMEDABAD] At the time of hearing, the Ld. DR has not brought anything on record contrary to the finding of the Ld. CIT-A which has been reproduced somewhere in the preceding paragraph. Therefore, we do not find any reason to interfere in the finding of the Ld. CIT-A. Hence the ground of appeal of the revenue is hereby dismissed. Addition of unexplained credit entries in bank - In the case on hand, the AO has not carried out any independent inquiry and not found any infirmity in the primary documents filed by the assessee but merely doubted the genuineness of transaction since interest was not paid on impugned loan. In our considered view, the prerogative to pay/charge interest on loan is between the parties who accepted/provided the loan and the same also depends upon various factors. Merely the parties agreed to not to charge/pay interest on loan will not vitiate the genuineness of such loan transaction unless and until the revenue brought some cogent material on record to prove that such transaction of loan is not genuine.
-
2023 (4) TMI 854
Deduction u/s 80P - interest received from SBI and Dena bank savings account - HELD THAT:- Since the Hon ble Gujarat High Court in the case of SBI [ 2016 (7) TMI 516 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT ] has already decided this issue against the assessee, ground no.1 is dismissed. Interest received from Nationalised Banks/other Institutions - It is pertinent to note that the interest received from Nationalised Banks are not allowable u/s 80P or the Act, but at the same time the assessee has incurred certain expenditure to earn the said interest and whether the said proportionate expenditure should be allowable or not needs to be verified. Therefore, this issue is set aside to the file of the Assessing Officer for proper adjudication and verification. Ground no.2 is partly allowed for statistical purpose. Interest received from Co-operative Banks - It is pertinent to note that it is not disputed fact that the interest of Rs.11,23,088/- was not received by the assessee from Co-operative Banks which are registered under Co-operative Societies Act and as per the decision of Hon ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Surat Vankar Sahakari Sangh Limited [ 2016 (7) TMI 1217 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT ] interest received from Co-operative Banks are allowable for deduction under Section 80P(2)(d) of the Act. Therefore, ground no.3 is allowed.
-
2023 (4) TMI 853
Deduction u/s 80G - trust had made expenses more than 5% of its total receipts, which are of religious nature and therefore the application of the assessee was liable to be rejected - assessee applied for 12AA certificate which was granted to the assessee - HELD THAT:- CIT(Exemption), Ahmedabad has rejected the claim of the assessee on an incorrect presumption of fact that during the year under consideration, the religious expenses incurred by the assessee was more than 5% of the total income, and therefore the application of the assessee is liable to be rejected in terms of section 80G(5B) - assessee has submitted that during the year under consideration, the religious expenses/poojari expenses were only to the tune of 1.67% of the total income and CIT(Exemption), Ahmedabad has taken an incorrect figure of total income for working out the percentage of religious/Poojari expenses. Therefore, since apparently CIT(Exemption) Ahmedabad dismissed the application of the assessee on an incorrect presumption of facts as to the figure of total income of assessee trust, the matter is being set aside to the file of CIT(Exemption), Ahmedabad for de novo consideration of the application of the assessee, after giving due opportunity of hearing to the assessee to present the correct facts and decide the case on merits. Appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
-
2023 (4) TMI 852
Long term capital gain - relevant date for claiming benefit of Indexation - Property received under WILL - Period of holding of previous owner - sale of immovable property - as AO held that the benefit of indexation will be available only from the financial year 2007-08 instead of the financial year 1981-82 as claimed by the assessee - AO granted the deduction on an ad-hoc basis @2% towards all expenses incurred on transfer by the assessee - CIT-A granted partial relief to the assessee - HELD THAT:- On similar issues, as raised in the present appeal, the coordinate bench of the Tribunal in the case of the brother of the assessee Sohrab Fali Mehta [ 2023 (4) TMI 467 - ITAT MUMBAI] for the assessment year 2016-17 partly allowed the appeal filed by the Revenue wherein held assessee would be entitled for indexed cost of acquisition benefit from F.Y.1981-82 on the cost. Also partial allowance of expenditure incurred wholly and exclusively in relation to the transfer of the subject mentioned property. Computing the long-term capital gains as per provisions of section 50C - HELD THAT:- As decided in case Maria Fernandes Cheryl vs ITO [ 2021 (1) TMI 620 - ITAT MUMBAI] amendment made in the scheme of section 50C(1), by inserting third proviso thereto and by enhancing tolerance band for variations between stated sale consideration vis- -vis stamp duty valuation from 5 percent to 10 percent are effective from the date on which section 50C, itself was introduced, i.e 1-4-2003. Thus we direct the AO to compute the capital gains after granting the benefit of the 3rd proviso to section 50C of the Act to the assessee. As a result, ground No. 4 is allowed for statistical purposes.
-
2023 (4) TMI 851
Nature of expenses - Expenditure on stores and spares consumed during the year - disallowance on the ground that such stores and spares can be used as self-contained machinery items - HELD THAT:- As this Tribunal in assessee s own case [ 2022 (11) TMI 129 - ITAT SURAT ] held that assessee has replaced the existing part of machine or replaced the parts which have become obsolete and the replacement was essential. It was held that the replacement has not increased the existing capacity, so entire expenditure was treated as revenue expenditure. Decided in favour of assessee. Non-grant/short term of TDS - HELD THAT:- As counsel pointed out that AO has not granted TDS credit despite of repeated reminders. Therefore, we direct the AO to examine the relevant documents and evidences and grant the TDS credit in accordance with law. Charging of interest u/s 234C and 234D - HELD THAT:- As these grounds are consequential in nature, therefore we direct the AO to compute the interest under section 234C and 234D in accordance with the provisions of law.
-
2023 (4) TMI 850
Undisclosed Deposits in bank account - AO treated the net amount as undisclosed business receipt - AO estimated the profit at 8% - HELD THAT:- The estimation of profit is always involved a guess work. It can never be accurate but there must be some material justifying the guess work of the adjudicating authority. We are also facing the same problem because before us also, there is no detail. However, to some extent, the uniform rate of 8% available in Section 44AD applicable on some contractor is not to be applied on every time on every type of business. Therefore, we direct the ld. Assessing Officer to take an estimated income at 4% and credit of income disclosed by the assessee is to be given accordingly. Undisclosed contract receipt - Submission of the assessee is that as far as the different of Rs.5,00,000/- is concerned, it never came to his bank account, therefore, it was not recognized as a gross receipt on which profit is to be worked out. The revenue authority failed to find out any fault in this submission. They simply rejected. It is to be demonstrated from the details that the assessee has received the complete money and failed to offer income of the differential amount. Therefore, this fold of ground of appeal is allowed and the addition is deleted. CIT(Appeals) confirming the addition of commission income - non disclosure of full income in the return - AO has not brought any facts of the records. He has simply observed like this, the assessee has submitted that nothing such type of facts are reflected in TDS statement filed under section 226AS by the prayer. Therefore, there is no basis to make this addition, it is deleted.
-
2023 (4) TMI 849
Rectification of mistake u/s 154 - revenue being added by the AO as not recognised by the assessee - uncertified bills deducted from the turnover in the statement of Profit and Loss relates to Credit notes issued by the- assessee on account of Contractees not allowing the measurements/quantification and value in the running bills submitted to them by the assessee as per the terms of the contract - HELD THAT:- As intimation u/s. 143(1)(a) was issued by the AO on 13.11.2019 and the assessment proceedings had already commenced by issuance of notice u/s. 143(2) on 22.09.2019. AO while passing the assessment order u/s. 143(3) of the act, incorporated the disallowance, that was made in the intimation dated 13.11.2019. For status of appeal being preferred by the assessee against the assessment order passed u/s. 143(3) of the act dated 17.05.2021, the Ld.AR submitted that the appeal is pending before the Ld.CIT(A). In the present appeal, the Ld.AR cannot argue on merits of the addition made in respect of the alleged revenue being added by the Ld.AO, as not recognised by the assessee. Since the same is not emanating from the order of CIT(A) against which the assessee is in appeal.CIT(A) has not gone into merits and has held there is no mistake apparent on record u/s. 154 with respect to the impugned issue. From the perusal of facts in our considered view, the addition made cannot be co Disallowance in respect of the alleged employees contribution to the EPF/ESI - It is a mistake apparent on record that, the Ld.AO incorporated the addition while passing the assessment order without considering or calling for the details during the assessment proceedings. Even otherwise when the assessee s case was picked up for complete scrutiny, there was no need to issue an intimation u/s. 143(1)(a) of the act separately, disallowing the employees contribution towards ESI/PF deposited beyond the due date by the assessee. We therefore allow the present appeal only in respect of Ground no. 4(d). The assessee is granted liberty to raise the disallowance before the Ld.CIT(A) in the appeal that is pending for disposal before the first appellate authority against the assessment order dated 17.05.2021.
-
2023 (4) TMI 848
Penalty imposed u/s 271B - Failure to get books of account audited - Assessee not maintained books of accounts - HELD THAT:- As decided in the case of CIT v. Bisauli Tractors [ 2007 (5) TMI 181 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT] wherein it is held that if a person is not maintained books of account, the question of audit does not arise. imposition of penalty u/s 271A of the I.T.Act for alleged non-compliance with section 44AA of the I.T.Act may arise but the provisions of section 44AB of the I.T.Act do not get violated in a case where accounts have not been maintained at all. Therefore, it was concluded by the Hon ble Allahabad High Court [ 2007 (5) TMI 181 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT] that the penal provisions of section 271B of the I.T. Act would not apply. In the instant case as mentioned earlier, admittedly, the assessee has not maintained books of account, penalty imposed u/s 271B of the I.T. Act for non-furnishing of audit report does not arise. Therefore, we delete the penalty imposed u/s 271B of the I.T. Act. Appeal filed by the assessee is allowed.
-
2023 (4) TMI 847
Assessment of trust - Disallowances towards the salary/remuneration paid to Treasurer and Secretary of the Trust - CIT-A deleted the addition as amount was not excessive and that the AO has failed to demonstrate that the aforesaid amount of salary was not reasonable - CIT(A) observed that the bus hiring charges and hostel building rent were essential for travelling and accommodation facility provided to the students by the school and observed that these activities were fundamental to the fulfilment of the objects of the assessee-trust - HELD THAT- We do not find any reason to interfere with the above findings of the CIT(A) and the same is upheld. Even otherwise, at this stage, Assessee has submitted that even otherwise, the disputed tax amount involved in this appeal was less than the monetary limit prescribed by the Department for filing the appeal before the Tribunal. DR even could not rebut the aforesaid contention of the AR. We do not find any merit in this appeal of the Revenue and the same is accordingly dismissed.
-
2023 (4) TMI 846
Penalty u/s 270A - under-reporting income - Addition of 20% of the expenditure on estimated basis - HELD THAT:- The assessee has submitted that all the details before the AO and also expenditure incurred by the assessee. AO, on estimated basis, disallowed an amount and no penalty can be levied under section 270A of the Act. AO has disallowed 20% of the expenditure claimed by the assessee. Disallowing the expenditure cannot be said that it is an under-reporting of the income. Assessee has filed all the details and not only that the Assessing Officer, on estimated basis disallowed the expenditure. Once, the disallowance made on estimated basis, no penalty can be levied. Therefore, the penalty levied by the AO and confirmed by the ld. CIT(A) is unsustainable and thus, the penalty levied u/s 270A of the Act is deleted. Appeal filed by the assessee is allowed.
-
2023 (4) TMI 845
Unexplained cash Payment - search action u/s. 132 - name of assessee appeared in some document found during the search action in the case of third party [Ameya Group] - HELD THAT:- It is not clear from the documents on record that as to whether the name of Smt. Neelam Sankhe mentioned in the documents seized from Ameya Group is that of the assessee or any other person with a similar name. The assessee has throughout denied having any transaction with Ameya Group. Assessee emphatically denied to have received any amount from Ameya Group. Except for the name there is nothing on record to link the assessee with the documents found during the course of search. There is no reference to any statement, if any, recorded during the search explaining the reason of assessee s name in the documents seized during the course of search. The purpose for making cash payment to assessee is also not comprehensible. Addition cannot be made in the hands of assessee only for the reason that the name of the assessee appears in the documents found during the search in case of third party. The identity of the person has to be established and the reason for making such payment has to be linked. In the instant case live reason for the cash payment to the assessee by Ameya Group is absent. No reason to sustain the addition. Ergo, impugned orders are set-aside and appeal of the assessee are allowed.
-
2023 (4) TMI 844
Income accrued in India - A ssessee has received an amount from the services rendered to Atos India Cost recharge of Microsoft license fees - royalty and / or Fee for Technical Service (FTS) - India-USA DTAA - Assessee acquired global license and allowed the group entities to use the above Licenses on the basis of requirements and billed them according to their usage - reliance placed by the assessee on the IRS guidance rejected - HELD THAT:- Taxability and character of an item has to be determined in accordance with the contents of the Indian Income Tax Act and the provisions of the Treaty between India and USA Assessee has provided two services to its subsidiary in India for the execution of sub-contract with Tower Watson India. It is important to note that the services provided by Atos India to Tower Watson India are independently charged to tax as business receipt. For execution of services to Tower Watson by Atos India is based on the Global contract executed by the Assessee and Tower Watson Pennsylvania Inc. We observe that the License for usage of the copy righted products are with Microsoft only and the assessee has acquired global right and transferred the above said Licenses to its group entities based on the requirements. Whether this transaction falls under the category of Royalty or FTS is the issue. Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of Engineering Analysis Centre of Excellence (P) Ltd [ 2021 (3) TMI 138 - SUPREME COURT] held that Microsoft Software products are sold to end users by Microsoft Corporation and whatever the license which are routed through the middle man, the Microsoft does not grant any right or interest, least of all, a right or interest to reproduce the computer software. Further such reproduction is expressly interdicted and expressly stated that no vestige of copyright is at all transferred either to the distributor or to the end user. Therefore, it does not fall in the category of Royalty or copyright. Assessee has acquired the global license and allowed the group entities to use the above Licenses on the basis of requirements, the assessee has billed them according to their usage by properly documenting the usage and charged to them. As held in the decision of Hon ble Supreme Court and Hon ble Delhi High Court, the Microsoft Licenses are not falling under the category of Royalty or Copy Rights under the definition of respective categories. Hence the claim of the assessee is proper and we direct the Assessing Officer to delete the proposed addition in this regard. Service desk provided by the assessee to the employees of Tower Watson to monitor the IT related glitch - As per the terms of agreement, the engagement clause clearly indicate that the assessee engages the services of Atos India to perform the services in accordance with the scope, delivery schedule, services levels and other essential factors as detailed in the services schedule (schedule no 2) of the sub contract agreement. The services provided by the assessee to the group entity are separate and nothing to do with the separate sub contract awarded to the Atos India, which is independent contract. The service desk services are provided to all the group entities to enable the common services provided to the Watson Group employees and there is nothing on record to indicate any independent service provided to Atos India or IT enabled services which gives knowledge made available to Atos India - services provided by the assessee is separate and it only collected the related cost to maintain the service desk. Therefore, it is a receipt which will fall under the Article 7 of the treaty. Hence, the addition proposed and sustained by the Ld.DRP are beyond the scope and accordingly Assessing Officer is directed to delete the same. Decided in favour of assessee.
-
2023 (4) TMI 843
TP Adjustment - comparable selection - SWD Services Segment - HELD THAT:- Companies functionally dissimilar with that of assessee need to be deselected from final list. ITeS Segment - We notice that in the order giving effect to the DRP directions, the TPO had considered 14 comparables, the 35th percentile of the average margin of which is 10.43% and the 65th percentile is 19.54%. We also notice that the operating margin of the assessee as has been considered by the TPO works out to 15.16% (rectification petition filed u/s. 154). Therefore, we see merit in the submission of the ld. AR that the assessee s margin is within the arm s length even as per the TPO s order. We also notice that the TPO in spite of the fact that the assessee s margin is within the range, has proceeded to make a TP adjustment which, in our view, is not warranted. We therefore direct the TPO to consider the submissions made by the assessee in the rectification petition dated 22.8.2022 and pass the order accordingly. Working capital and Risk adjustment - TPO did not give working capital adjustment for the reason that the assessee has demonstrated that there is a difference in the level of working capital employed by the assessee vis- -vis the comparables - HELD THAT:- Working capital adjustment should be allowed and direct the AO/TPO to examine the issue afresh after affording the Assessee opportunity of being heard. Interest on outstanding receivables - TPO considered the interest on receivable as a separate international transaction and accordingly which is upheld by the DRP - HELD THAT:- As relying on Tivo-Tech Pvt. Ltd. [ 2023 (2) TMI 837 - ITAT BANGALORE] we hold that the interest on delayed receivable be calculated at LIBOR + 2%. It is ordered accordingly.
-
2023 (4) TMI 842
Addition u/s 56(2)(vii)(b)(i) - difference between the actual purchase consideration of 3 N.A. plots of land and market value as per stamp valuation authorities - CIT(A) rejected the contention of the assessee that the 3 NA plots received by the assessee were stock in trade and thus upheld the action of AO of property being capital asset in the hands of the assessee - HELD THAT:- As in the case of CIT (Central), Calcutta v. Associated Industrial Development Company (P) Ltd. [ 1971 (9) TMI 3 - SUPREME COURT ] observed that whether a particular holding of shares is by way of investment or forms part of the stock-in-trade, is a matter within the knowledge of the assessee, when holds the share and it should, in normal circumstances, be in position to produce evidence from its record as to whether it has maintained any distinction between those shares which are its stock-in-trade and those which are held by way of investment. Assessee has not demonstrated before us that whether he fulfils the criteria for treating the purchase of three plots as a stock in trade of his business. Merely presumption by the assessee that those three plots were intended for further sale and therefore those were stock in trade, is not sufficient and it has to be proved by way of evidences, which the assessee has failed, therefore, no error in the order of the CIT(A) on the issue in dispute in upholding the applicability of section 56(2)(vii)(b) in the case of the assessee. Accordingly, we dismiss the ground No. 1 of the appeal of the assessee. Valuation report of Departmental Valuation Officer - assessee contested the valuation report of the Departmental Valuation Report before the Ld. CIT(A) but he did not any cognizance to those submission of the assessee - HELD THAT:- On perusal of Departmental Valuation Report we find that Ld. DVO has taken into consideration the fact of encroachment and construction of Sulabh toilet on the land, which is evident from specifications of the property under description. Departmental Valuer has relied on for instances of the sale happened in the proximate period, but there is no remark, whether those lands were also subjected to encroachment. If those lands were not subjected to encroachment, then he is required to consider impact of adverse possession by the encroacher on the land of the assessee and corresponding impact on the value of the property. During the course of the hearing DR also expressed his inability to verify or confirm this fact readily. In the circumstances, we feel it appropriate to restore this issue back to the file of AO for verification from the Ld. Departmental Valuation Officer and consider the impact of encroachment on the land, if not already considered in the valuation report dated 31/10/2017. The ground of the appeal of the assessee is accordingly allowed for the statistical purposes. Amount paid in cash by Sh Rajeev Y Patil towards the consideration for purchase of property - HELD THAT:- Assessee failed to substantiate whether those payments made by Rajeev Y Patil have been made to the seller of the land on behalf of the assessee. The assessee did not produce Mr Rajeev Y Patil or the seller of the land before the lower authorities to support his contention that those cash amounts were paid on behalf of the assessee. In such circumstances, we do not find any error in the order of the Ld. CIT(A) on the issue in dispute and accordingly, we uphold the same. The Ground of the appeal of the assessee is accordingly dismissed.
-
2023 (4) TMI 841
TP Adjustment - Comparable selection for ITES segment - exclusion of (i) Infosys BPO Limited, (ii) SPI Technologies Pvt. Ltd. and (iii) Eclerx Services Limited - HELD THAT:- We find for identical assessment year, the Tribunal in the case of M/s.Global E-Business Operations Pvt. Ltd [ 2022 (11) TMI 1139 - ITAT BANGALORE] excluded the above three companies on account of functional dissimilarity with that of ITES segment. Thus we direct the TPO to exclude above three companies from the list of comparables and re-compute the ALP of the international transaction. Grant of Working Capital Adjustment - In the view of the ruling in the case of M/s.Huawei Technologies India (P) Ltd. v. JCIT [ 2018 (10) TMI 1796 - ITAT BANGALORE] the basis of rejection of the relief by the DRP is no longer valid. We therefore, direct the AO/TPO to consider the workings in the light of the aforesaid ruling and allow appropriate adjustment in arriving at an arm s length price. Seeking inclusion of three companies, namely, (i) Informed Technologies Limited, (ii) Ace BPO Services Pvt. Ltd. and (iii) Crystal Voxx Limited - As per relevant finding of the Tribunal in the case of M/s.Global E-Business Operations Pvt. Ltd [ 2022 (11) TMI 1139 - ITAT BANGALORE] we restore the issue raised to the AO / TPO. The AO / TPO shall consider the issue afresh in accordance with law.
-
2023 (4) TMI 840
Deduction of TDS and credit to the Central Government - taxes deducted by the assessee and paid to the department pertaining to M/s. Gintek Eswation, South Africa with respect to payments - HELD THAT:- The matter is remanded back to the file of Assessing Officer for verification and grant relief if the assessee has deducted the tax at source and deposited the same with the Central Government with respect to M/s. Gintek Eswation, South Africa. TDS u/s 195 - payments made by the assessee to BAE Systems, USA for site testing charges - HELD THAT:- From the nature of charges paid by the assessee to the BAE Systems, USA, it is clear that charges were essentially in the nature of the ancillary and subsidiary services as the main focus of agreement was only purchase and installation of Long Range Position and Velocity Tracking Doppler Radar System. The incidental services which were referred to in invoice cannot be independently or stand alone basis be provided to the assessee by BAE Systems, as the purchase and installation of such instrument is sine qua non. In our view, the services which can independently or on stand alone basis, be provided, coupled with the fulfillment of the other requirement of Para 4(b) of the DTAA would only attract the Fee for included services'. In the present case, testing and on-site training in India cannot be provided on its own, unless it is coupled with purchase of equipment and therefore, these services did not fall within the purview of Fee for incidental services . In the present case, the services, which are the subject matter of the dispute, do not fall under Fee for incidental services , hence, would not fall under Royalty and as such, not chargeable in India as per Clause 12 of DTAA, read with sections of Income Tax Act and therefore, the charges paid by the assessee to BAE Systems would not be subject to deduction of TDS. Thus, the action of lower authorities that the assessee was liable to deduct TDS while making the payment to BAE Systems is unsustainable and therefore, the same is dismissed. With respect to payment made to Syscom Instruments, Switzerland, the disallowance had been upheld being not pressed and thirdly with respect to payment made to Grintek Eswation, South Africa, the issue is remitted back to the file of Assessing Officer for verification whether taxes were deducted at source or not ? In the light of the above, ground nos. 3 and 4 are partly allowed for statistical purposes. Disallowance of Prior Period Expenses - HELD THAT:- Undoubtedly, during the year under consideration, the assessee has claimed prior period expenses and had also shown the prior period income during the year under consideration - allow the claim of the assessee. Undoubtedly, the assessee is a large organization and this kind of inadvertent pitfall, is bound to occur on account of the size and spread of the assessee. Since the assessee has shown not only the prior period expenses but also shown the prior period income, therefore, both are required to be considered for the purposes of computing the income of the assessee.
-
Customs
-
2023 (4) TMI 839
Seeking grant of anticipatory bail - gold allegedly recovered and seized is owned by the firm of the applicant and was being transported to its branch office at Jaipur from Kolkata (head office) - HELD THAT:- It is evident and accepted to the parties that co-accused Sumit Verma from whose possession 3000 grams of gold is said to have been recovered of the value of Rs. 1,75,55,000/- has not been apprehended from any exit or entry point to or from the territory of India. The case of the D.R.I. as is reflected from the submissions made by Shri Digvijay Nath Dubey is that the applicant before this Court and co-accused Sumit Verma have failed to produce any document or conclusive proof which may show that the ownership of the gold belongs to them and in absence of any conclusive proof pertaining to the ownership, the gold in all probability should be presumed is to be smuggled in the territory of India and as it has also been confessed by Sumit Verma. Having regard to all the facts and circumstances of the case including the guidelines which has been issued by the Government of India, Ministry of Defence, Department of Revenue dated 16.8.2022 pertaining to the arrest of various offenders of the Customs Act as well as the fact that alleged offences against the applicant are punishable with upto seven years of imprisonment and gold has not been recovered from the possession of applicant, in the considered opinion of this Court the liberty of the applicant may be protected for some time, subject to his cooperation in the investigation - Let better counter affidavit be filed by the DRI mentioning therein about the culpability of the applicant more so in the background of the fact that the gold recovered from the co-accused Sumit Verma has not been apprehended from any exit or entry point to or from the territory of India and a representation is alleged to be pending before DRI, submitted by Mr. Ranjan Soni, partner of the firm. Let this case be listed on 3.5.2023.
-
2023 (4) TMI 838
Scope of the investigation - involvement of high-ranking political functionaries of the State - gold smuggling activities - Seeking direction to the Customs and Enforcement Directorate, Government of India to conduct a fair and time bound investigation into allegations of money laundering and illegal gold smuggling - HELD THAT:- When the Customs had, pursuant to the show-cause notice, conducted an investigation and filed complaints based on the materials collected, a direction to conduct a further investigation into the involvement of other persons ought not to be indulged in by this Court in the exercise of the Jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution, unless there are exceptional circumstances. Except for assumptions and surmises, no material has been produced by the petitioner to countenance such exceptional circumstances. The complaints already filed are under the Customs Act, and they are pending consideration - there are sufficient provisions under law to add parties in case any offence is revealed later as having been committed by any person. It is evident that even the very apprehension expressed by the petitioner regarding the non-conduct of a fair and proper investigation is without any basis. The Customs as well as the Enforcement Directorate, have conducted or are conducting proper investigations. There are also no reasons to assume that if the involvement of any person is revealed in the investigation, they will not be proceeded against. For, the dictum Be you ever so high, the law is above you applies with equal vigour to all, irrespective of status or position. Petition dismissed.
-
2023 (4) TMI 837
Confiscation - penalties - smuggling - crude gold bars of foreign origin / foreign marked gold bars which are smuggled into India from Sri Lanka - Burden to prove - request for cross-examination denied - whether DRI is the proper officer for issuing the Show Cause Notice? Whether the gold is of foreign origin? - HELD THAT:- Admittedly, the gold does not have any foreign markings. It is the case of department that the gold assayer Sh. G.K. Shankar has issued certificate that the purity of the gold is 24 karat and of 999.9%. It is contended by department that only foreign gold would have such high purity. It is seen mentioned in the mahazar dated 23.1.2017 that the gold was assayed by the assayer on the same day. However, the said document is not made part of relied upon documents for the purpose of issuing Show Cause Notice. In the case on hand, the certificate does not mention 999.9% as contended by department. It merely says 24 carat. It does not mention the method adopted to test the purity. Further, the certificate is not made part of RUD. The copy of certificate is not given to the respondent. Again, the request to cross-examine the assayer was denied. It is produced belatedly and there is no petition filed by learned AR stating reasons to accept the document at the appellate stage. On the totality of these facts, we have to hold that the certificate of the assayer produced by the learned AR cannot be accepted in evidence. Apart from the certificate, the department relies on the statements given by the respondent on 23/24.1.2017. These statements have been retracted later by the respondent. In such circumstances, the department has to place reliable evidence to prove that the gold is smuggled from Sri Lanka. There is no evidence to prove that the gold is smuggled from Sri Lanka or any connection of the gold with Murugan or Batcha. In the absence of foreign markings, there should be cogent evidence to establish that the gold is of foreign origin. The contention of the learned AR that if gold jewellery when converted into bullion will not have 999.9% purity is without any substance. The statement of respondent which has been retracted cannot be the basis for holding that the gold is smuggled unless corroborated by other evidences. The view arrived by the Commissioner (Appeals) is legal and proper and does not require any interference. The issue on merits is found against the appellant / Revenue and in favour of the respondent. It is made clear that in this appeal we have not addressed the issue as to whether the Show Cause Notice issued by DRI is valid and proper. The appeal is dismissed.
-
2023 (4) TMI 836
Rejection of request of the IOC for conversion of DEEC Shipping Bills to Drawback Scheme - delay on the ground of delay and lack of documentary evidence. Time Limitation u/s 149 of CA - HELD THAT:- The relaxation in granting conversion under the present circular No 36/2010 was provided only because of the representation made to the Board and keeping in view the various decisions of the Tribunal that amendment to shipping bill after export of goods is governed by the proviso to Section 149 of the Customs Act, 1962 and if the requirements of the said proviso are satisfied, conversion of shipping bill should be allowed. Accordingly, it was clarified that conversion may be permitted in accordance with the provisions of section 149 of the Customs Act on a case to case basis on merits provided the Commissioner of Customs is satisfied on the basis of documentary evidence which was in existence at the time the goods were exported to ascertain that goods were eligible for the export promotion scheme to which conversion has been requested. The conversion was then made subject to certain other conditions, primarily the time limit to make the application for conversion, within a period of three months from the date of Let Export Order (LET) - The conditions enshrined in the circular would definitely enable the department to achieve the objective to avoid duplicacy of the benefit which would prejudice the revenue. If the request / application seeking conversion is made within a specified period, it would enable the department to verify the claim diligently and promptly as also the availability of the documents. In the present case as noted by the adjudicating authority there has been delay of nearly 6 months to 1 year which is beyond the permissible time limit and for which no reason have been stated by the appellant. The next condition under the circular is regarding the satisfaction of the Commissioner of Customs on the basis of the documentary evidence as without it, it would not be feasible for the department to verify the claim for conversion. As is evident from the circular, the specific requirement is that the documents must show the use of the inputs in the resultant export product, fact of export and the fulfilment of the conditions of the export promotion scheme is satisfactorily proved. The sole object is to avoid duplicity of the benefit under both the schemes - In the present case, the adjudicating authority has specifically observed that the applications made are lacking supporting documents copies of Shipping Bills, Export Invoices, Airway Bill and Advance Authorizations / Licenses. The appeal filed by the Appellant was barred by time and was rightly rejected by the competent authority and also for the reason for non-filing of the requisite documents in terms of Section 149 of the Customs Act as well as the Circular. Appeal dismissed.
-
2023 (4) TMI 835
Revocation of Customs Broker License - appropriation of Bank Guarantee of Rs.10,000/- - immediate suspension - grant of opportunity of personal hearing - principles of natural justice - whether the CHA has violated the provisions of CHALR 2004 and misused the license granted to them? - HELD THAT:- From the findings given by the Adjudicating Authority in the present OIO, it is seen that none of the submissions relied by the Appellant have been addressed. The Adjudicating Authority has simply reiterated that detailed inquiry conducted by the Officer and that the contraventions are clearly coming out in the Inquiry Officer s Report and after this he has proceeded to go ahead with confirming the demand - while deciding the issue as to whether the present Appellant is liable to be penalised under Section 114, this Tribunal has come to a conclusion that no explicit findings have been given by the other Adjudicating Authority to the effect that the present Appellant has abetted in contravening any provisions of Customs Act. The Tribunal has set aside the penalties imposed under Section 114 on the present Appellant and their Director. The revocation of license is a very harsh measure and is liable to be set aside - However as admittedly some minor contraventions have taken place, it is found that CHA is required to be penalised with Rs.10,000/- which has already been done by encashing Bank Guarantee No.2/2007. Appeal disposed off.
-
2023 (4) TMI 834
Smuggling - Confiscation - Yellow peas - Motor Dal - bags bear foreign markings (corroborative evidence or not) - illegal import - HELD THAT:- The seizure was made from the Godown of the Appellant at Shillong city, which is not connected to the International Border. Goods were purchased under valued documents, which are mix of Indian and imported origin and the purchase documents were not proven to be false or fake. No evidence other than foreign markings on the bags was adduced to prove that the goods were smuggled. Foreign markings or foreign origin of goods by itself does not render the goods as smuggled. Burden to prove the smuggled nature of goods is on the Revenue. Such burden was not discharged by adducing any positive tangible evidence. Thus, foreign origin of the goods even proved, smuggled nature thereof is not proven. In the liberalized economy, foreign goods have free entry and found in the shops in abundance for almost each and every commodity. Foreign markings ipso facto does not prove smuggled nature of the goods. It needs corroborative evidence which is totally absent in the case. Therefore, Order of confiscation of the goods deserves to be set aside and quashed with consequential relief to the Appellant. Appeal allowed.
-
2023 (4) TMI 833
Levy of penalty u/s 112(b)(ii) of the Customs Act, 1962 - alleged smuggling of miscellaneous contraband goods - existence of mens rea or not - reasons to believe - no follow up action was conducted nor any statement of Shri Ajay Sarawagi was recorded - No summons issued u/s 108 of the Customs Act, 1962 - non-issuance of Show Cause Notice or any personal hearing notice - principles of natural justice - HELD THAT:- The role of the Appellant in the whole episode has been derived only from the statement of Shri Amarjit Sahu and two past penalties imposed on the Appellant. Proceeding on the basis of statement of co-accused is not sufficient to hold the Appellant guilty of smuggling in absence of any search and recovery from his place. The alleged statement of the co-accused cannot be relied upon to implicate a person on charges of smuggling. Therefore, it was incumbent on the Investigating Officer, to have searched and recorded statement of the Appellant and to further prosecute him in the matter on the basis of its finding. As the department has neither shown any evidence nor explained satisfactorily as to why they have not conducted follow up action with the Appellant at the investigation stage, not even a Summon U/s 108 of the said Act was issued. Therefore, the proceedings against Shri Ajay Sarawagi on the basis of the statements of the co-accused is not sufficient to hold him guilty of smuggling, especially when no search and recovery has been done at his place. It is a settled law that no person shall be implicated in a crime merely on the basis of an allegation leveled by a co-accused, without any corroborative evidence. Section 112(b) of the Customs Act, 1962 is not applicable to the facts of the present case because records show that the Appellant had never acquired possession or in any way was connected with the activities mentioned in the Section or in any manner dealing with any goods which the Appellant knew or had reason to believe are liable to confiscation. It is now well established that mens rea is an important ingredient for imposing penalty on the persons enumerated in Section 112(b) of the Customs Act, 1962. The evidence brought out by the department nowhere suggests that the Appellant was aware that the goods in question were smuggled into the country. The penalty imposed on the Appellant, therefore, cannot be sustained. Past offence can be at best enhancer of civil and/or criminal liabilities, but no penalty can be imposed on any concurrent alleged offence. It is well settled law that no penalty under section 112(b)(ii) of the Customs Act, 1962, can be imposed without proving the nexus with the goods under seizure which are liable for confiscation. The Appellant is not liable for imposition of penalty under Section 112(b) of the Customs Act, 1962 - the penalty of Rs. 50,00,000/- imposed under Section 112(b) (ii) of the Customs Act, 1962 is set aside - appeal allowed.
-
Insolvency & Bankruptcy
-
2023 (4) TMI 832
CIRP - Service of notice when admitted claim of Operational Creditors is 10% - Whether is it not mandatory on the part of the RP to issue notice to all the Operational Creditors in terms of Section 24(3)(c) of I B Code if it is found by him that their admitted claim is more than 10%? - HELD THAT:- Section 24 deals with the meeting of committee of creditors. Section 24(1) provides that the members of the CoC may meet in person or by such electronic means as may be specified. Section 24(2) provides that all the meetings of the CoC shall be conducted by the RP. Section 24(3) provides that the RP shall give notice of each meeting of the CoC including the authorised representatives, members of suspended board of director and or partners of the Corporate Persons and Operational Creditors or their representatives if the amount aggregated is not less than 10% of the debt. A bare reading of the provision i.e. Section 24(3)(c) shows that it is mandatory in nature and it is incumbent upon the RP to serve notice to all the Operational Creditors of each meeting of the CoC or if they elect their authorised representatives after notice is received by them, then the notice of meeting to the authorised representatives. There is no question of otherwise knowledge acquired of the meetings of the CoC by the Operational Creditors as has been argued by Counsel for Respondent No. 1. It is also true that in view of Section 24(4) the Operational Creditor or their representatives shall not have a right to vote in each meeting of the CoC in which they participate and in case they remain absent despite notice then they cannot rake up a dispute for getting the proceeding invalidated on that account. It is held that it is incumbent upon the RP to serve notice of each meeting of the CoC to the Operational Creditors or their representatives if the amount of the aggregated due is not less than 10% of the debt. Since, in this case, it is found that no notice was given by the RP to the Operational Creditors, therefore, it is a dereliction of duty on his part for which he deserves to be burdened with costs. The cost is assessed at Rs. 1 Lakh which shall be paid by the RP to the Operational Creditors (Appellants), who are three members, in equal proportion, by way of bank draft within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this order. Looking at the fact that amount involved is too meagre to set aside the resolution plan which has been approved by the CoC by not less than 96.38% voting share, we do not find it to be a fit case for setting aside the resolution plan much less the order dated 19.09.2022 - Appeal disposed off.
-
2023 (4) TMI 831
CIRP - Initiation of Contempt proceedings - willful disobedience of order - Contemnor failed to remit the conducting charges after July 2022 for Paras Mall, Zirakpur - willful disobedience beyond reasonable doubt, proved or not - Revival of the CIRP against the Respondent - HELD THAT:- The law is well settled that jurisdiction for punishing a Contemnor can be exercised only when willful disobedience is proved beyond reasonable doubt. It is clear that in contemplation of the Settlement Agreement, payments were made by the Respondent and after the Settlement Agreement was entered on 14.07.2022, further payment of INR 58,20,378/- odds was made. For non-payments thereafter, the Respondent has come up with the plea as has been communicated by the Respondent to the Applicant by email dated 30.08.2022, as extracted above and other facts as pleaded in the reply filed to this Contempt Application. The facts and pleadings by the parties indicate that there were some issues between the parties regarding the premises for which conducting charges were required to be paid by the Respondent - the facts and circumstances do not indicate that there is any willful disobedience by the Respondent in discharging their obligations under the Settlement Agreement. It does appear that as per Settlement Agreement, certain payments have been made and issues arose between the parties after taking the possession of the premises by the Respondent and inspection and reports were obtained by the Respondent regarding the condition of the premises and structural stability. We are not inclined to proceed to punish the Respondent for any contempt of order of this Court dated 27.07.2022. We, thus, decline to proceed to punish the Respondent for contempt. We, however, make it clear that insofar as inter se rights of the parties regarding claims, we have not expressed any opinion and the same can be examined and decided in appropriate Forum. Revival of the CIRP against the Respondent - HELD THAT:- Section 9 proceedings were initiated by the Operational Creditor for a total amount of INR 1,16,79,622/-. It is true that settlement entered between the parties on 14.07.2022 was for an amount of INR 6,09,68,538/-, which was the amount claimed to be in default from 1st November, 2019 to 23rd March, 2020. The total debt in Section 9 Application having been paid, we are of the view that no useful purpose will be served in directing revival of Section 9 Application and proceeding of CIRP in respect of Corporate Debtor. The payments, having been made for which Section 9 Application was filed, it is clear that Respondent has capacity to make the payment and no CIRP needs to be undertaken at this stage - with regard to claim by the Operational Creditor, proceedings under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 have been initiated as noted above, where notices have also been issued to M/s Cinema Ventures Private Limited, where claim of both the parties shall be examined and determined. This has also weighed in not reviving Section 9 proceedings initiated by the Operational Creditor. Contempt cases dismissed.
-
FEMA
-
2023 (4) TMI 830
FEMA (Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999) case pending since 2020-21 pursuant to the blocking of the petitioner's two bank - Seeking Defreezing of accounts blocked by the bank since the year 2020 - HELD THAT:- We find that the petitioner has filed the present writ petition seeking, in effect, the same relief that was sought in the previous writ petition but, it is clothed in representations which is a masquerade. A second writ petition for the same cause of action is anyway not maintainable. No liberty was granted to the petitioner to file a fresh petition. In the present petition we also find that relevant facts have been concealed by the petitioner inasmuch as the learned counsel for the petitioner has not been able to point out any details of proceedings and the stage at which they are pending before the authorities concerned. For the reasons aforesaid and given the observations in the previous judgment dated 04.05.2021 passed by this Court [ 2021 (5) TMI 1061 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT] this writ petition is dismissed with cost of Rs. 25,000/- which shall be payable by the petitioner within one month.
-
Service Tax
-
2023 (4) TMI 829
Benefit of Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019 - failure to transfer the amount of discounted arrears of tax determined by the Designated Committee latest by 30.06.2020 - HELD THAT:- True it is that the petitioner had made an attempt but it does not appear from the record that the account of the Revenue was credited with the said discounted amount of arrears of tax determined by the Designated Committee latest by 30.06.2020. The record also gives an impression that the said glitch was at the stage of the account of the petitioner and so not at the stage of the account of the Revenue. This Court has already taken a view against the petitioner in Ms. Metrics Promotions Events vs. Commissioner CGST ors. [ 2022 (6) TMI 980 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT ] by relying upon the decision of the Apex Court in Yashi Constructions vs. Union of India [ 2022 (3) TMI 110 - SC ORDER] , that the scheme cannot be tinkered with unless the vires of the scheme is challenged. Thus, the procedure prescribed under the scheme has to be strictly followed. The last date fixed for payment has to be strictly adhered to - Any extension to the said date which the scheme does not subscribe, would lead to opening a Pandora's box as there will be a flood of litigation bringing assessees to the Court by taking the plea of technical glitch. Petition dismissed.
-
2023 (4) TMI 828
Levy of Service Tax - services of sales promotion and marketing provided outside India and for which commission received by the appellant - services of sales promotion and marketing received by the appellant from foreign based agents and commission paid - reverse charge mechanism - Export of services - POPOS Rules - levy of penalty - HELD THAT:- Since the recipient of service is located outside India and the payment of commission against said service is received in India, service clearly falls under the category of Export of Service in terms of Rule 3(1) of Export of Service Rules - From Rule 3(1) clause (iii), it can be seen that service being Business Auxiliary Service falling under sub-clause (zzb) of Section 65(105) of the Finance Act, 1994 is covered under clause (iii). There is no dispute that service of Promotion and Marketing was provided in relation to business or commerce and such service was received by the recipient located outside India. Therefore, the service is clearly covered under Export of Service Rules. Accordingly the same cannot be charged to service tax. This issue is clarified in the Board Circular No. 111/05/2009-ST in Para 2 and 3. Identical issue has been considered by this Tribunal in the case of YAMAZAKI MAZAK INDIA PVT LTD VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, PUNE-I [ 2017 (8) TMI 1050 - CESTAT MUMBAI] wherein after considering various decisions, the Tribunal has held that services provided by the appellant classify as export of service - the service of the appellant in present case being absolutely identical, under the same set of facts, it amounts to Export of Service hence it is not liable to service tax. Accordingly, the demand on the Export of Service i.e. Business Auxiliary Service is not sustainable hence the same is set-aside. Commission paid to the foreign based agent towards the service of sales promotion and marketing received by the appellant - HELD THAT:- There is no dispute that the receipt of service from the service provider located outside India and the recipient of service is in India, the appellant is liable to pay service tax under reverse charge mechanism in terms of Section 66A of the Finance Act, 1994. The appellant up to 30.09.2009 paid service tax along with interest - exemption was denied only on the ground that the appellant have not mentioned invoice number in the shipping bills for export of goods. However, the use of input service received is meant for export of goods only. Except the lapse of not mentioning invoice number in the shipping bill, there is no other violation of notification. Merely for the small procedural lapse exemption cannot be denied - the appellant is entitled for the exemption Notification No. 18/2009-ST dated 07.07.2009. Levy of penalty - HELD THAT:- Since the appellant have admittedly paid service tax along with interest and moreover, they were otherwise entitled for the Cenvat credit for the service tax they have paid, in a routine course, no malafide intention can be attributed to the appellant, therefore invoking Section 80, in the facts and circumstance of the case, the penalty is not imposable accordingly, the same is set-aside. Appeal allowed.
-
2023 (4) TMI 827
Maintainability of appeal - appeal dismissed as being time barred - Section 85 (3) of Finance Act, 1994 - HELD THAT:- It is undisputed by the appellants that they have filed the appeals before the Ld.Commissioner (Appeals) against the Order-in-Original beyond six months time limit prescribed under Section 85 (3) of Finance Act, 1994 as observed by the Ld.Commissioner (Appeals). The appellant has filed the appeals beyond the time limit prescribed under Section 85 (3) of Finance Act, 1994. Accordingly, there are no infirmity with the impugned order and the same is upheld. The appellants are dismissed as time barred.
-
Central Excise
-
2023 (4) TMI 826
E-filing of appeals in the High Court - implementation of Phase III of the e-Courts project - HELD THAT:- It has been noted that:- (i) E-filing of appeals has not been enabled in the High Courts of Allahabad, Uttarakhand, Karnataka, Andhra Pradesh, Guwahati, Manipur, Tripura and Meghalaya; (ii) Nearly 62% of appeals by the revenue have been filed before the High Courts in e-filing mode which is expected to increase following the order of this Court dated on 6 February 2023; (iii) Only 1% of the appeals before the ITAT have been filed in the e-filing mode; (iv) As of date, even after e-filing, the ITAT is insisting on physical submission of appeals; (v) 90.29% of cases under falling the jurisdiction of the Chief Commissionerates have been e-filed; and (vi) The e-filing module developed by NIC for CESTAT has been tested during the first week of March 2023 and its module is undergoing security audit. Recently, a communication has been addressed by the Chief Justice of India to all the Chief Justices of the High Courts to facilitate the process of e-filing, particularly in appeals by the revenue and to gear up for the implementation of Phase III of the e-Courts project - The Registrar (Judicial) of this Court shall forward a copy of this order to the Registrars General of the High Courts of Allahabad, Uttarakhand, Karnataka, Andhra Pradesh, Guwahati, Manipur, Tripura and Meghalaya. Necessary steps should be taken to facilitate e-filing at least of revenue appeals. As regards the ITAT, it is incumbent on the tribunal to ensure that revenue appeals are filed only in the e-filing mode and a target date of 30 June 2023 should be set down - The Ministry of Finance shall depute a senior officer to engage with the Acting President of the ITAT. If the rules are required to be amended, they should be amended to incorporate e-filing requirements. An updated status report shall be placed on the record on the next date of listing - List the Civil Appeals on 28 July 2023.
-
2023 (4) TMI 825
Clandestine manufacture of labelled and unlabelled biris - Non-issuance of proper invoices - reasonable doubt and mere suspicion or sole entries in certain records - denial of cross-examination - violation of principles of natural justice - period January, 2007 to September, 2008 - HELD THAT:- While recovery of the private records from the premises of the appellant have not been disputed. The appellants have denied lack of complete knowledge thereto as well as its contents. It has been their case that the said register does not belong to them and could have been left behind at their premises by one of the several traders visiting their premises. It is on the basis of this register that the charge for duty evasion during the period January, 2007 to September 2008 has been worked upon - it is well settled that mere entries in a diary/register or other records, without any corroborative evidence cannot be the basis to fasten the short-levy and uphold the charge of clandestine manufacture and clearance. To sustain the charge of clandestine manufacture and clearance without duty payment, other corroborative evidence is required in support and merely on the strength of statistical data, the charge of duty evasion cannot be upheld. The charge of clandestine clearance is required to be proved beyond an iota of doubt and by irrefutable evidence. Then only can imposition of duty liability on the said goods is sustainable. Thus other tangible, sufficient and corroborative piece of evidence is necessary to establish the charge of clandestine manufacture and clearance. Each link in the process is required to established - The burden to establish the factum of clandestine clearance is upon the revenue and required to be established beyond all reasonable doubt and mere suspicion or sole entries in certain records whose authenticity itself is under challenge cannot be the singular yardstick to uphold such a contention. It is settled law that the noticee has to be offered all reasonable opportunity of defence and any levy fastened denying natural justice is clearly unsustainable - the twin facets of non-supply of certain records more particularly DSA inform RG-12A and the lack of opportunity of cross examination of the witnesses are in clear violation of legal principles rendering the impugned order unsustainable. In fact, non-consideration of a contention raised in defence is not only prone to mis-carriage of justice, but is also reflective of non-application of mind. The noticee had in proceedings before lower authority made a very strong assertion requesting for copies of said documents containing references of Central Excise Invoices and by non-supply thereto, he has been denied an appropriate opportunity for his defence. Likewise, for want of recovery of any non-duty paid stocks from the buyers as well as other independent records in support of the claim of clandestine manufacture and clearance, the charge cannot be sustained on a mere bland statement/allegation made by purchasers. Moreover, denial of cross-examination of these witnesses only accentuates the claim in pursuit of a free, fair exploration of truth and justice. The impugned order, therefore, suffers from this inherent infirmity for failure to comply with natural justice - Appeal allowed.
-
2023 (4) TMI 824
Valuation of waste/bye-product - Fatty Acid - applicability of cum-duty price for the goods cleared - Applicability of N/N. 89/95-CE dated 18/05/1995 - HELD THAT:- There is no dispute regarding liability of Central Excise duty. The Appellant has initially cleared the goods without payment of duty by availing the benefit of Notification No. 89/1995 dated 18.05.1995. Subsequently on the advice of the Department, they agreed and paid the duty by treating the value as cum-duty price. When duty is not collected separately, the price actually realized is deemed to be cum-duty price. In the present case also, initially the appellant cleared the goods without payment of duty by availing the Exemption under Notification 89/95 dated 18/05/95 - From the Circular No.749/65/2003-CX dated 26.09.2003 and the Explanation to Section 4, it is clear that when the duty is not charged separately, the price collected is deemed to be cum-duty price. The Appellant has already adopted the value realized as cum-duty price and paid the duty accordingly. Thus, the duty paid by the Appellant is in order. The demand raised on the Appellant is not sustainable and the impugned order confirming the demand is liable to be set aside - Appeal allowed.
-
CST, VAT & Sales Tax
-
2023 (4) TMI 823
Seeking recovery of arrears of tax - petitioner mainly contended that Form 19 B signed by the said Kanthimathi would reveal that it is a security bond given by her, personally undertaking to pay the Tax Fee or other amount due that will occur against the said Kanthimathi - HELD THAT:- As the dealer did not pay the tax arrears of Rs.2,99,525/- action was initiated under the Revenue Recovery Act by initially addressing the Sub-Registrar, Vadavalli by creating encumbrance on the property belonging to the defaulter's wife, which was made as security at the time of registration. Subsequently, the Department came to know that the writ petitioner / Tmt.M.Karpagam had purchased the property under sale deed dated 07.03.2008 - The Government usually does not create mortgage at the time of registration. However, such security bonds are executed with the property details and with a personal undertaking and therefore, the said undertaking is binding in respect of the property schedule provided in the bond. Thus, the contentions of the writ petitioner is to be rejected. The Explanation-I to Section 24 (15-A) of the erstwhile Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Rules, 1959 reveals that, where the security furnished in the form of immovable property, the person furnishing it may in any town to which Sub-Section (f) of Section 58 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 Central Act IV of 1883 is applicable, mortgage such property to the Government by deposit of title deeds. Therefore, it is necessary to create a mortgage as contemplated under the Transfer of Property Act. In the absence of creating any such mortgage, mere personal undertaking cannot be construed as a mortgage or charge created under Explanation I to Section 24 (15-A) of the erstwhile TNGST Act or under the Transfer of Property Act. The Form 19-B security bond signed by the vendor of the petitioner smt R.Kanthimathi is restricted only to the extent of her personal undertaking and there is no mortgage or charge created in respect of the property purchased by the petitioner from the said Kanthimathi. Thus, the security bond executed by the vendor of the petitioner is not in consonance with the Form prescribed under the erstwhile TNGST Rules - When the subject property, which has not been mortgaged or charge has been created in consonance with the provisions of the erstwhile TNGST Act and Rules. The contention of the respondent that they are entitled to create an encumbrance in the office of the Sub-Registrar is untenable and the encumbrance made without creating any mortgage or charge cannot be held as in consonance with the provisions of the erstwhile TNGST Act. This being the factum established, the actions initiated against the petitioner is in violations of the provisions of the TNGST Act and more so the petitioner is not a sales tax assessee and she is the bonafide purchaser of the property from her vendor Smt.Kanthimathi. The order impugned and the consequential entry of encumbrance made by the 2nd respondent / Sub-Registrar of Assurances on the petitioner's property Door No.12/36 A Ramalakshmi Nagar, Goundampalayam Road, Idayarpalayam, Coimbatore 641 044 are quashed - Writ Petition stands allowed.
|
