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 2024 October Day 30 - Wednesday

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

Newsletter: Where Service Meets Reader Approval.

TMI Tax Updates - e-Newsletter
October 30, 2024

Case Laws in this Newsletter:

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



Highlights / Catch Notes

    GST

  • Secondment of employees and expats: No invoicing, no tax liability - Circular prevails.

    In cases involving secondment of employees and placement of foreign expatriates to assist functions, the value ascribed to supply of goods and services is regulated by Rule 28 of Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017. Despite payments made, no invoices were raised by entities for services provided by related foreign entities. The Circular's stance treating value as 'Nil' in such cases may be contentious or contrary to Second Proviso of Rule 28. However, as no invoices were generated in present petitions, the value must be treated as 'Nil' per Circular's terms. Consequently, no tax liability arises, rendering impugned Show Cause Notices futile and impractical. The High Court set aside the Show Cause Notices and allowed the petition.

  • Businessman denied bail for operating fake firms, crores through illegal fund transfers.

    Economic offenses involving large-scale fraud, money laundering, and corruption are viewed seriously as they affect the economic fabric of society. The present case relates to registration of fake GST firms using the informant's PAN and Aadhaar cards without consent, resulting in illegal profits through fund transfers to other accounts, creating a money trail of crores. The applicant's involvement in these transactions with fake firms is evident. Though released on bail in the CGST Act case, the present IPC offense is distinct, not amounting to double jeopardy. Economic offenses warrant denying bail, especially when the accused holds influence. The chargesheet submission and rejection of co-accused's discharge application indicate sufficient evidence. Bail considerations are case-specific, focusing on securing the accused's presence for trial. Given the large-scale economic impact, bail is denied to the applicant.

  • Economic fraud & money laundering case involving crores from fake firms; charges proven, bail denied due to societal impact.

    Economic offences involving large-scale fraud, money laundering, and corruption are viewed seriously as they impact the economic fabric of society. Bail may be denied in such cases, especially if the accused holds a position of influence or power. This case involves a money trail of crores resulting from the registration of fake firms using Aadhaar and PAN cards, affecting society on a large scale. The discharge application of one accused was rejected, indicating the charges are proven. Once a chargesheet is submitted and discharge is rejected in an economic offence with a substantial money trail, the case for bail is not made out, and such accused cannot be dealt with leniently. The court must be cautious in exercising discretion u/s 438 of CrPC in economic offences with significant societal impact. Precedents alone cannot be the basis for granting or refusing bail; considerations must be case-specific, focusing on securing the accused's presence for trial. Based on the nature of the accusation, the applicants' roles, and the reasons given in judgments, this is not found to be a fit case for granting bail.

  • Failed prosecution against company MD for alleged tax evasion; no active role found. Court allows probe sans coercive steps for 6 weeks.

    Petition challenging initiation of criminal proceedings against petitioner, Managing Director of a company, for alleged tax evasion by misrepresenting vehicle ownership to evade motor vehicle tax. Court observed petitioner not directly involved in alleged forgery or alteration of documents by educational society. Petitioner having fixed abode, apprehension of absconding unfounded. Directed police to investigate without coercive steps against petitioner for six weeks, petitioner to cooperate. Matter listed after four weeks for filing counter-affidavit.

  • Vouchers: Instruments that facilitate supply, qualify as 'goods' under GST laws. Trading in them amounts to supply of goods or services.

    Vouchers are instruments representing value that facilitate supply of goods or services. They qualify as movable property and constitute 'goods' under GST laws. Trading in vouchers for consideration amounts to supply of goods u/s 7(1)(a) of CGST Act. When vouchers represent right to receive goods/services at future date without physical exchange, trading activity involves transfer of such rights, treated as supply of service. For intermediaries arranging distribution/sale of discount vouchers earning commission/discount, GST liability arises on service of facilitating voucher distribution. Trading in vouchers is taxable event, time of supply being when vouchers are traded/sold, with value being margin between buying and selling price. Supply of vouchers is taxable as goods u/s 12(4), while commission/discount earned is taxable service.

  • Income Tax

  • Extended due date for filing Income Tax returns for companies to 15th Nov 2024 for AY 2024-25 -25.

    The circular extends the due date for furnishing return of income for the Assessment Year 2024-25 from 31st October 2024 to 15th November 2024 for assessees referred to in clause (a) of Explanation 2 to sub-section (1) of section 139 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) exercised its powers u/s 119 of the Act to grant this extension.

  • Tax penalty quashed after errors rectified in revised assessment order.

    The High Court quashed the penalty imposed u/s 270A, holding that the foundation for penalty proceedings was extinguished due to the subsequent rectification order. The initial assessment order failed to grant credit for TDS, prompting the petitioner to file a rectification application u/s 154. Despite delays, the rectification order was eventually passed, merging the original assessment order. Consequently, the demands, penalties, and issues arising from the initial assessment order lost sanctity. The court ruled that no further action could be taken based on the flawed initial assessment after the rectification order addressed the errors, rendering the penalty proceedings inconsequential.

  • Penalty imposed for negative interest spread on unsecured loans, assessee seeks immunity.

    This case pertains to the imposition of penalty u/s 270AA for under-reporting of income due to misreporting. The assessee had availed interest-bearing loans and advanced unsecured loans, with the interest payable on certain loans being higher than the interest earned. The Assessing Officer (AO) made an addition on account of the negative interest spread and initiated penalty proceedings, alleging misreporting of income. However, the High Court observed that prima facie, it did not appear to be a case of misreporting as the facts were disclosed by the assessee. The AO passed the penalty order without considering the assessee's contentions due to technical difficulties. The High Court set aside the AO's order and remanded the matter for fresh consideration of the assessee's request for immunity from penalty u/s 270AA.

  • Taxman's Powers Upheld: Court Validates Income Tax Authorities' Jurisdiction to Issue Assessment Notices.

    The High Court examined the jurisdiction of the Assessing Officer (AO) and the prescribed income-tax authority to issue notices u/s 143(2) of the Income Tax Act. It held that either the AO or the prescribed authority can issue such notices, as evident from the expression "as the case may be" in Section 143(2). The Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) is empowered u/r 12E of the Income Tax Rules to authorize an Income Tax Officer as the prescribed authority for issuing notices u/s 143(2). In the present case, the CBDT had authorized the Assistant/Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (International Taxation), Circle-1(1)(1), Delhi, to act as the prescribed authority. Therefore, the notice issued by this officer u/s 143(2) was valid and within jurisdiction. The contention that only National Faceless Assessment Centre officers can issue such notices was rejected as unsupported by the provisions. The prescribed authority can issue, not merely serve, notices u/s 143(2). Once the jurisdiction to issue notice u/s 143(2) is established, the AO cannot be faulted for completing the assessment.

  • Indian Court Allows Belated Foreign Tax Credit Claim Despite Delayed Form Filing.

    The High Court, following the judgment in G.M. Knitting Industries (P.) Ltd., held that filing a foreign tax credit claim u/r 128 is directory and not mandatory. The petitioner, an Indian resident working in the UK, filed an Indian tax return claiming foreign tax credit u/s 90 but uploaded Form 67 with delay due to COVID-related difficulties in obtaining foreign documents. The court condoned the delay, noting Sections 90, 90A, and 91 aim to avoid double taxation. Despite the delayed Form 67 filing, the impugned order was set aside, allowing the foreign tax credit claim under Article 24 of the India-UK tax treaty.

  • Tax case transfer from Chennai to Kolkata for coordinated lottery business probe Interpretation.

    Transfer of case u/s 127 - sufficient material existed for transfer from Income Tax Office, Corporate Ward-2(3), Chennai to DCIT, Circle-4(4), Kolkata ('Central Circle'). Search and seizure u/s 132 revealed incriminating documents connecting petitioner's involvement in lottery business operations in West Bengal as sub-distributor, stockist, printing press, etc. Considering petitioner's reply, transfer ordered to centralize investigation along with eight other similar cases. Contentions of lack of opportunity or insufficient material rejected. Transfer for coordinated investigation in public interest permissible despite inconvenience. No prejudice caused as no adverse assessment order passed, only transfer u/s 127. Strict interpretation of taxing statute warranted. Writ petition dismissed.

  • Unfair Tax Penalty Imposed: Lack of Reasonable Opportunity Violates Natural Justice.

    Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) was imposed in violation of principles of natural justice by not granting reasonable opportunity to the petitioner. The ITAT passed orders on 09.01.2024 and 10.01.2024, but the respondent remained inactive for nearly five months. At the eleventh hour, on 19.07.2024, the respondent issued notice quantifying the penalty amount and calling upon the petitioner to pay, without providing adequate time for submitting contentions and documents despite requests. The respondent proceeded to pass orders on 30.07.2024 rejecting submissions and on 31.07.2024 imposing penalty u/s 271(1)(c), in violation of principles of natural justice. The High Court set aside the impugned orders on this ground.

  • Software Support Service Income - Not Taxable as Fees for Included Services under India-US Tax Treaty.

    The assessee received amounts from Indian customers for supplying software updates, patches, and on-call support services. The issue pertained to taxability of these receipts as Fee for Technical Services (FTS)/Fee for Included Services (FIS) under the Income Tax Act and India-USA Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement (DTAA). The assessee contended that on-call support services cannot be treated as FIS under Article 12(4)(a) of the DTAA, as it is not ancillary to royalty income, or under Article 12(4)(b), as no technical knowledge, know-how, or skill was made available to the service recipient. The Assessing Officer invoked Article 12(4)(b) to tax the receipts, but failed to establish the 'make available' condition through cogent evidence. The Tribunal held that for the 'make available' condition to be satisfied, the service recipient must be capable of performing such services independently without the service provider's aid. As the assessee continued providing on-call support services yearly, it proved that technical knowledge was not transferred to the recipients. Hence, the receipts were not taxable as FIS under Article 12(4)(b) of the DTAA. Regarding interest on refund u/s 244A, the Tribunal directed the Assessing Officer to verify the assessee's claim an.

  • Tax authorities clash on cash sales addition: Unrecorded income or unexplained money? Assessee's view upheld.

    The crux of the case revolves around the applicability of Section 69A read with Section 115BBE of the Income Tax Act on the addition made by the Assessing Officer (AO) towards undisclosed cash sales. The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (PCIT) invoked Section 263, deeming the AO's order erroneous for not taxing the addition as unexplained money u/s 69A at the higher rate prescribed in Section 115BBE. However, the Tribunal held that the PCIT erred in invoking Section 263 for the following reasons: 1) The AO made the addition after due inquiry and show-cause, considering it as unrecorded cash sales based on seized material, not unexplained money u/s 69A. 2) The source of the addition was explained by the assessee, and the AO took a plausible view on the matter. 3) The amount of addition was disputed, being a mathematical extrapolation challenged by the assessee. 4) The AO consciously did not invoke Section 69A or Section 115BBE while making the addition, aware of the provisions. 5) No corresponding assets were found during the search to treat the addition as unexplained money. 6) The PCIT merely intended to amend the tax rate without finding any error or prejudice in.

  • Customs

  • Revised list of high-end refurbished medical devices allowed for import with conditions on residual life, warranties & clearances.

    This instruction revises the list of high-end and high-value used/refurbished medical equipment, other than critical care medical equipment, that can be imported into India. The revised list contains 38 types of equipment, including MRI, CT, PET-CT, mammography, radiotherapy devices, robotic surgical systems, ophthalmic laser systems, endoscopes, orthopaedic navigation systems, and dental imaging systems like CBCT. It outlines conditions for import, such as residual life, warranties, availability of service and spares, disposal norms, and statutory clearances. The equipment must be enlisted by the health ministry, and importers need authorization from DGFT if the import policy is restricted. Customs authorities shall verify documents before clearing consignments. The instruction supersedes the previous list and aims to regulate imports of such refurbished medical devices.

  • New land customs route notified for India-Bhutan trade via Ultapani.

    This notification amends the existing Principal Notification No. 63/1994-Customs (N.T.) dated 21st November 1994 to notify the Ultapani Land Customs Station (LCS) route. The road from Ultapani via Saralpara via Naharani (SSB Camp) to Sarpang District (Bhutan) has been notified as an approved route for import and export of goods across the land frontier with Bhutan. This amendment has been issued by the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs u/s 7 of the Customs Act, 1962, exercising powers to notify LCS routes.

  • Gift deed by defaulter to obstruct recovery labeled fraudulent; petitioner's conduct questionable.

    The court held that the gift deed executed by the defaulting brother in favor of the petitioner was a fraudulent attempt to obstruct the government from recovering legitimate dues. The timing of the gift deed, soon after the defaulter order, raised suspicion. The petitioner's conduct was questionable, including suppressing vital documents. The transaction appeared solely aimed at obstructing the sale of property to recover government dues. The court dismissed the petition with costs, stating that a petitioner with such conduct does not deserve extraordinary writ jurisdiction's assistance. The respondents were directed to initiate recovery proceedings against the petitioner for the defaulted dues.

  • Contradictory statements by Revenue reps raise concerns; Court orders inquiry, disciplinary action.

    The High Court expressed concerns over the Revenue's representative's contradictory statements regarding the availability of test reports issued by IRMRA during the main appeal hearing and the subsequent rectification application hearing before the Tribunal. The Court directed the Joint Chief Department Representative, Mumbai Bench CESTAT, to conduct a detailed inquiry into how such an incident occurred, identify the responsible individuals, and report to the Court on the disciplinary actions taken or proposed against those from the Revenue Department, as well as any actions against private individuals involved. The Court emphasized the seriousness of the matter, considering the high financial stakes and the series of appellants before the Tribunal.

  • DGFT

  • Revised import norms for Shea Stearine exports set; Oil content testing mandated.

    This public notice modifies the Standard Input Output Norm (SION) E-125 for the export of Shea Stearine. It amends the import entitlements for Shea Nuts, Shea Butter, Activated Bleaching Earth, and Acetone required for producing 1 MT of Shea Stearine for export. The notice specifies the revised quantities of import items and provides a formula to adjust the permitted quantity of Shea Nuts based on their oil content. It mandates customs authorities to test and endorse the oil content on import bills of entry. The SION is valid until 31.03.2027 and subject to reassessment to reflect industry pricing dynamics.

  • Major updates on RoDTEP rates for exported products across sectors like food, chemicals, plastics, and machinery.

    This document provides details on changes to the Remission of Duties and Taxes on Exported Products (RoDTEP) Schedules, specifically Schedule 4R, 4RE, and Annexures B, C, and D, consequent to amendments in the Customs Tariff Act. It lists tariff items along with their descriptions, recommended RoDTEP rates as a percentage of FOB value, caps in rupees per unit quantity, and the applicable unit quantity codes. The changes cover various product categories, including food items, chemicals, plastics, textiles, base metals, machinery, vehicles, aircraft, and arms/ammunition components. The notification aims to align the RoDTEP rates with the revised tariff structure, facilitating the remission of duties and taxes for exported goods.

  • Corporate Law

  • Bank declared borrower 'fraud' without due process.

    Writ petition allowed. Impugned order by respondent bank declaring petitioner as 'fraud' set aside for lack of due process. No show cause notice issued to petitioner proposing fraud classification. Petitioner not informed about upload on RBI's Central Fraud Registry. No relevant documents like forensic audit report supplied. No hearing afforded before fraud declaration on 20.06.2019. Supreme Court in State Bank of India vs. Rajesh Agarwal held principles of natural justice must be followed while enforcing RBI's Master Directions on Fraud. Civil consequences jeopardize borrower's business future, necessitating hearing before declaring ineligibility for institutional finance under Clause 8.12.1. Impugned order quashed for violating natural justice.

  • Company seeks court intervention against RBI's inaction on alleged mismanagement by financial firm.

    This case pertains to a writ petition filed by a company invoking Article 226 of the Constitution, seeking directions to the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) to initiate action against Exclusive Capital Limited under Chapter IIIB of the RBI Act, 1934. The Court held that a writ of mandamus lies when statutory authorities fail to exercise their powers, leading to irreparable harm to statutory rights. Despite repeated reminders, Exclusive Capital Limited's management failed to provide organizational details, statutory compliance records, personnel particulars, and financial statements, indicating mismanagement. The company's reply denied RBI's concerns and claimed the conversion of OCDs into CCPS was to restore leverage ratio, and that RBI regulations were inapplicable. The Court distinguished the Krishnakrupa case, where the High Court refused to interfere in RBI's banking affairs. Finding ample material warranting an inquiry into Exclusive Capital Limited's affairs and RBI's failure to exercise supervisory powers, the Court directed the suspension of the company's Board of Directors until further orders and compliance reporting on 02.12.2024.

  • Expenditure Department's memo not anti-competitive; can't be re-litigated after Supreme Court ruling.

    Res judicata principle applies - Department of Expenditure (DOE) not an 'enterprise' u/s 2(h) of Competition Act, 2002 - Office Memorandum (OM) issued by DOE not an agreement u/s 3(4) and Section 3(1) of the Act. Supreme Court held DOE cannot be considered an enterprise regarding OM dated 24.03.2006. Appellant approached Respondent again with same facts, parties and prayer which was previously declined. Appellate Authority upheld earlier order, no further appeal filed. Legal maxim 'nemo debet lis vexari pro una et eadem causa' applies - no man should be vexed twice for same cause. Issues cannot be re-agitated as two courts already held DOE not an enterprise and OM not an agreement violating Section 3(4). Appeal dismissed.

  • IBC

  • Creditors' Wisdom Prevails: Apex Court Upholds CoC's Commercial Prudence in Resolution Plan Approval.

    The court upheld the approval of the resolution plan, rejecting the wrongful allocation of Rs. 79 lakhs as the liquidation value. The Supreme Court's decision in Amit Metaliks Limited, considering Sections 30(4)(2) and 53, held that the NCLAT rightly observed that the amendment to Section 30(4) amplified the CoC's considerations for exercising commercial wisdom regarding the viability and feasibility of the resolution plan, ensuring fair distribution among similarly situated creditors. The court relied on Amit Metaliks and Paridhi Finvest Pvt. Ltd., where the dissenting financial creditor's claim for the liquidation value payment was rejected. Despite the pending larger bench interpretation of Section 30(2)(b)(ii), the Supreme Court's decision in Amit Metaliks is subsisting, leading to the dismissal of the appeal.

  • Indian Laws

  • Auction purchaser's claims rejected after property released from attachment under state depositors act.

    The court dismissed the petition challenging the auction process for sale of the property and seeking refund of the purchase price paid by the petitioner as the successful auction purchaser. The property was initially attached by the competent authority under the Maharashtra Protection of Interest of Depositors (MPID) Act due to the financial establishment's failure to return deposits. Subsequently, the designated court released the property from attachment, enabling its sale through auction under due process of law. The court held that once the property vested in the competent authority and was sold to the petitioner after lifting the attachment, the petitioner could enjoy the property without requiring title deeds. The court clarified that the secured creditor's rights flow from agreements creating security interest, which was not applicable in this case involving attachment under the MPID Act. Consequently, the petitioner's claims for refund, interest, damages, and compensation were rejected as lacking merit.

  • Court Rejects Excess Stamp Duty on Court-Auctioned Properties.

    This case deals with the levy of deficit stamp duty and penalty in a court-conducted auction sale. The key points are: In a court-supervised auction sale, the stamp authorities cannot determine the true market value of the property sold and levy stamp duty based on that valuation. Once the bid is accepted by the court-appointed committee and the sale is confirmed at the bid price, which is above the reserve price, that price is considered the market value. The Supreme Court has conclusively held that in a court auction, the registering authority cannot question the market price determined by the court's sale process, as it would amount to sitting in appeal over the court's decision. The transparent court auction process is considered one of the best methods to determine market value. The High Court allowed the petition based on the Supreme Court's ruling in ASL Vyapar Pvt Ltd and its own decision in Spectrum Constructions.

  • Complaint under Negotiable Instruments Act via Power of Attorney: Validity examined at pre-trial stage.

    Validity of a complaint filed u/s 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act through a Power of Attorney. The court held that it can quash complaints at the pre-trial stage u/s 482 of CrPC if unimpeachable material indicates the accused was not involved or no offense is made out. However, following the Supreme Court's ruling in Rathish Babu Unnikrishnan v. State, the court must examine whether the factual defense disproves the entire allegations. The complaint mentioned the authorized representative had personal knowledge and competence to file the case. While the petitioner raised questions about the attorney's capability, the extent of knowledge, and the validity of the compromise deed, these issues did not disprove the allegations and can be determined during trial after evidence is led. The court dismissed the petition, finding that the petitioner raised questions of fact and law better left for adjudication at the trial stage.

  • SEBI

  • SEBI mandates periodic reporting for research analysts and proxy advisors to enhance transparency.

    This circular from SEBI provides the periodic reporting format for Research Analysts and Proxy Advisers. Key points: - Research Analysts (RAs) are required to furnish periodic reports to the Research Analyst Administration and Supervisory Body (RAASB), while Proxy Advisers (PAs) must submit reports to SEBI. - The reports must be submitted half-yearly within 30 days from the end of each half-year (September 30 and March 31). - Detailed formats are prescribed for RAs (Annexure I) and PAs (Annexure II) to provide information on their operations, compliance, clients, fees, complaints, and other aspects. - The formats require comprehensive details on the entity, its employees, directors, shareholding, bank accounts, certifications, inspections, advertisements, services offered, and complaints received/resolved. - For RAs, specific details on research reports, recommendations, public appearances, and investor charter/complaints disclosure are sought. - For PAs, details on voting recommendations, reports issued for company meetings, clients/subscribers, and fees received are mandated. - The circular aims to enhance transparency, disclosure, and oversight of RAs and PAs to protect investor interests and regulate the securities market effectively.

  • VAT

  • Exclusion of service tax component from VAT calculation upheld for works contracts.

    The petitioner is required to calculate taxable turnover by excluding turnover not subjected to tax, exempt goods, and labor/service charges for works contracts as per Section 14 of the Gujarat Value Added Tax Act, 2003. VAT is payable on the taxable turnover, with an option for lump sum tax u/s 3 read with Section 14. The issue pertains to whether the 'service tax' component collected by the petitioner should be included in the 'sale price' for VAT calculation. Referring to the Ambuja Cement Ltd. case, the Court held that the definition of 'sale price' u/s 2(24) is inclusive, not exhaustive. However, the intention is to include only specified duties/taxes like excise/customs, not service tax. Therefore, the petitioner is not liable to include the 'service tax' component in the 'sale price' for VAT computation. The orders setting aside composition tax permission solely on this ground are quashed, and the petitions are allowed.

  • Service Tax

  • Bank served with tax demand but no penalty due to unintentional non-disclosure.

    The appellant was liable to pay service tax on banking and financial services, but their failure to do so was not willful or deliberate. The non-disclosure of certain assessable items does not attract the extended period of limitation under the proviso to Section 73 of the Finance Act, 1994. No penalty is imposable on the appellant, but they must pay interest on the belated payment of tax u/s 75 of the Finance Act, 1994. The High Court partially allowed the appeal, holding that no penalty is payable by the appellant under any provisions of the Act, but they must pay interest on the belated tax payment.

  • Tax Credit Rules Simplified: Manufacturers & Service Providers Get Fair Dues.

    Reversal of CENVAT credit u/r 6(3A)(c)(iii) of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004. It clarifies that the term 'total CENVAT credit taken' used in the provision is unambiguous and should be interpreted as 'common input services taken' during the financial year, not the total CENVAT credit. The court held that the distortion in the old Rules was cured to ensure manufacturers/service providers do not pay reverse/pay excess amounts u/r 6(3A)(c)(ii). The trading activities carried out were considered "exempted service" within the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004, both before and after the amendment. The relevant provisions, Rules 2(e) and 6, underwent changes, addressing the distortion arising from strict application of the old format. The impugned order was set aside, and the appeal was allowed, entitling the appellant to consequential relief, if any.

  • Central Excise

  • Revised excise duty rates on blended aviation fuel: 2% for regional flights & 11% others.

    This notification amends the Central Excise notification No. 11/2017 to align it with the amended Fourth Schedule of the Central Excise Act, 1944. It inserts two new entries in the table, levying 2% excise duty on blended aviation turbine fuel drawn by selected airline or cargo operators for regional connectivity scheme flights from UDAN airports, and 11% duty on other blended aviation turbine fuel. The amendment comes into force from 29th October, 2024.


Articles


Notifications


Circulars / Instructions / Orders


News


Case Laws:

  • GST

  • 2024 (10) TMI 1534
  • 2024 (10) TMI 1533
  • 2024 (10) TMI 1532
  • 2024 (10) TMI 1531
  • 2024 (10) TMI 1530
  • 2024 (10) TMI 1529
  • 2024 (10) TMI 1528
  • 2024 (10) TMI 1527
  • 2024 (10) TMI 1526
  • 2024 (10) TMI 1525
  • 2024 (10) TMI 1524
  • 2024 (10) TMI 1523
  • 2024 (10) TMI 1522
  • 2024 (10) TMI 1521
  • 2024 (10) TMI 1520
  • 2024 (10) TMI 1519
  • 2024 (10) TMI 1518
  • 2024 (10) TMI 1517
  • 2024 (10) TMI 1516
  • 2024 (10) TMI 1515
  • 2024 (10) TMI 1514
  • 2024 (10) TMI 1513
  • 2024 (10) TMI 1512
  • 2024 (10) TMI 1511
  • 2024 (10) TMI 1510
  • 2024 (10) TMI 1509
  • 2024 (10) TMI 1508
  • 2024 (10) TMI 1507
  • 2024 (10) TMI 1506
  • 2024 (10) TMI 1505
  • 2024 (10) TMI 1504
  • 2024 (10) TMI 1503
  • 2024 (10) TMI 1502
  • 2024 (10) TMI 1501
  • 2024 (10) TMI 1500
  • 2024 (10) TMI 1499
  • 2024 (10) TMI 1498
  • 2024 (10) TMI 1497
  • 2024 (10) TMI 1496
  • 2024 (10) TMI 1495
  • 2024 (10) TMI 1494
  • 2024 (10) TMI 1493
  • 2024 (10) TMI 1492
  • 2024 (10) TMI 1491
  • 2024 (10) TMI 1490
  • 2024 (10) TMI 1489
  • Income Tax

  • 2024 (10) TMI 1488
  • 2024 (10) TMI 1487
  • 2024 (10) TMI 1486
  • 2024 (10) TMI 1485
  • 2024 (10) TMI 1484
  • 2024 (10) TMI 1483
  • 2024 (10) TMI 1482
  • 2024 (10) TMI 1481
  • 2024 (10) TMI 1480
  • 2024 (10) TMI 1479
  • 2024 (10) TMI 1478
  • 2024 (10) TMI 1477
  • 2024 (10) TMI 1476
  • 2024 (10) TMI 1475
  • 2024 (10) TMI 1474
  • 2024 (10) TMI 1473
  • Customs

  • 2024 (10) TMI 1472
  • 2024 (10) TMI 1471
  • 2024 (10) TMI 1470
  • 2024 (9) TMI 1649
  • Corporate Laws

  • 2024 (10) TMI 1469
  • 2024 (10) TMI 1468
  • 2024 (10) TMI 1467
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy

  • 2024 (10) TMI 1466
  • Service Tax

  • 2024 (10) TMI 1465
  • 2024 (10) TMI 1464
  • 2024 (10) TMI 1463
  • 2024 (10) TMI 1462
  • 2024 (10) TMI 1461
  • Central Excise

  • 2024 (10) TMI 1460
  • 2024 (10) TMI 1459
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax

  • 2024 (10) TMI 1458
  • Indian Laws

  • 2024 (10) TMI 1457
  • 2024 (10) TMI 1456
  • 2024 (10) TMI 1455
 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates