TMI Tax Updates - e-Newsletter dated: March 30, 2018 - with Direct Tax, Indirect Tax and GST Updates and Updates on FTP, FEMA, IBC & Corporate Laws etc. published on TMI with Latest Case Laws

Pricing Login

Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice : Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding

Case Laws Acts Notifications Circulars Classification Forms Manuals Articles News D. Forum Highlights Notes

TMI - e-Newsletter TaxTMI Income-tax Rules Amended: Form 3CD Gets Major... TaxTMI SCN Issued Two Days Beyond Section 73(2) Deadline... TaxTMI CBIC Revises Tariff Values Under Section 14(2) for... TaxTMI Diamond Imprest Authorisation Form Updated with... TaxTMI Sea Cargo Manifest Regulations: CBIC Extends... TaxTMI CBIC Implements Electronic Processing for Personal... TaxTMI CBDT Authorizes Waiver of Interest on Delayed... TaxTMI GST Assessment Order Set Aside for Lacking Document... TaxTMI SEBI Introduces New Governance Rules for High Value... TaxTMI Government exempts Bengal gram from AIDC and SWS... TaxTMI CGST Rules Amended: Rule 164 Changes Affect Tax... TaxTMI SEBI Eases ESG Compliance: New Green Credit... TaxTMI CBIC Clarifies Section 128A Waiver Eligibility for... TaxTMI Transfer of Development Rights Constitutes... TaxTMI GST Fraud Mastermind Denied Bail Under Sections... TaxTMI Latest Case-Laws TaxTMI Latest Notifications + Circulars TaxTMI GST Council Decisions TaxTMI

Home


Tax Updates - TMI e-Newsletters

Home e-Newsletters Index Year 2018 March Day 30 - Friday ← Older Newer →
TMI e-Newsletters FAQ
You need to Subscribe a package.
Newsletter: Where Service Meets Reader Approval. TMI Tax Updates - e-Newsletter March 30, 2018 Case Laws in this Newsletter: GST Income Tax Customs Corporate Laws Insolvency & Bankruptcy Service Tax Central Excise CST, VAT & Sales Tax Indian Laws TMI SMS A Chartered Accountant is not an aggrieved person against the Institute of Cost Accountants of India for using the acronym ICAI - HC Articles 1. APPLICABILITY OF SECTION 5 OF LIMITATION ACT IN CONDONING THE DELAY IN FILING APPEAL BEFORE THE NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL By: DR.MARIAPPAN GOVINDARAJAN Summary: The article discusses the applicability of Section 5 of the Limitation Act in condoning delays for filing appeals before the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) under the Companies Act, 2013. It highlights a Supreme Court case where an appeal was dismissed for being filed beyond the permissible 90-day period. The appellant argued that Section 5 of the Limitation Act should apply, allowing for further delay condonation. However, the Supreme Court ruled that the specific provisions of Section 421(3) of the Companies Act, which set a strict 90-day limit, override the general applicability of the Limitation Act, thereby dismissing the appeal. 2. Confusions in GST Law: Part 2 By: Altamush Zafar Summary: The article addresses complexities in the Goods and Services Tax (GST) law concerning Input Tax Credit (ITC) for financial institutions involved in lending and deposit activities. Interest from loans is exempt from GST, but other charges are taxable. Institutions must reverse ITC for purchases used in both taxable and exempt supplies, which can be challenging. The law allows financial institutions to claim 50% of eligible ITC, with the remainder lapsing. This raises issues when institutions engage in other taxable activities, such as trading in gold, as it complicates ITC calculations. Potential solutions include avoiding the 50% option or separate business registrations, both increasing compliance burdens. News 1. NITI Aayog releases Baseline Ranking of Aspirational Districts Summary: NITI Aayog has launched the baseline ranking for Aspirational Districts using 49 indicators across five key developmental areas: Health and Nutrition, Education, Agriculture and Water Resources, Financial Inclusion and Skill Development, and Basic Infrastructure. The 'Champions of Change' Dashboard will be available from April 1 for real-time data monitoring, allowing District Collectors to input data. The program aims to foster competition among districts to improve human development indicators through cooperative federalism. From May 2018, districts will be ranked on incremental progress. The initiative encourages districts to learn from each other and aims for inclusive growth and improved living standards. 2. 7th Edition of the Status Paper on Government Debt Summary: The seventh edition of the Status Paper on Government Debt, released by the Central Government, provides a comprehensive analysis of India's public debt, enhancing transparency and assessing debt health using international indicators. It highlights developments like the establishment of the Public Debt Management Cell as a precursor to the Public Debt Management Agency. The report indicates that the government's liabilities are on a medium-term declining path, with a prudent risk profile and reliance on market-linked borrowings for fiscal deficit financing. Conventional debt sustainability indicators show the government's debt profile is improving and comfortably sustainable. 3. Cabinet approves continuation of the Credit Guarantee Fund for Education Loans Scheme and continuation and modification of Central Sector Interest Subsidy Scheme Summary: The Cabinet Committee on Economic Affairs, led by the Prime Minister, approved the continuation and modification of the Credit Guarantee Fund for Education Loans and the Central Sector Interest Subsidy Scheme with a budget of Rs. 6,600 crore for 2017-2020. The revised scheme aims to provide education loans to 10 lakh students, increasing the loan ceiling to Rs. 7.5 lakhs and extending the moratorium to the course duration plus one year. It focuses on loans for professional/technical courses from accredited institutions. The scheme expects a 20% increase in loans disbursed annually, aligning with government policy to make quality education affordable. 4. Cabinet approves Export of all edible oils in bulk (except mustard oil) Summary: The Cabinet Committee on Economic Affairs, led by the Prime Minister, has approved the removal of restrictions on exporting all edible oils in bulk, except mustard oil. Mustard oil exports will remain limited to consumer packs up to 5 kg with a minimum export price. A committee will oversee the export/import policy on edible oils, considering factors like domestic production and international trade. This move aims to provide better market opportunities for farmers, utilize idle industry capacity, and simplify business operations. The decision follows a significant increase in oilseed production in recent years. 5. Cabinet approves enhancing the coverage of Pradhan Mantri Rojgar Protsahan Yojana Summary: The Cabinet Committee on Economic Affairs, led by the Prime Minister, has approved the expansion of the Pradhan Mantri Rojgar Protsahan Yojana (PMRPY). The Indian government will now cover the full employer contribution for the first three years for new employees across all sectors, including current beneficiaries. This initiative aims to provide a social safety net for informal sector workers and boost job creation. Since its inception in August 2016, the scheme has added approximately 3.1 million beneficiaries to formal employment, with over Rs. 500 crore spent. PMRPY incentivizes employers to expand their workforce, offering social security benefits to new employees. 6. Cabinet approves continuation of Nutrient Based Subsidy and City Compost Scheme till 2019-20 Summary: The Cabinet Committee on Economic Affairs, led by the Prime Minister, has approved the extension of the Nutrient Based Subsidy (NBS) and City Compost Scheme until the 2019-20 fiscal year. This decision involves a total expenditure of Rs. 61,972 crore for both schemes, with subsidies provided to fertilizer companies based on actual sales to farmers at subsidized rates. The schemes ensure the availability of fertilizers, specifically P K fertilizers and City Compost, at controlled prices. Initially governed by the NBS Scheme since 2010 and the City Compost Scheme since 2016, these programs are extended beyond the 12th Five Year Plan. 7. Cabinet approves fixation of Nutrient Based Subsidy rates for Phosphatic and Potassic (P&K) fertilizers for the year 2018-19 Summary: The Cabinet Committee on Economic Affairs, led by the Prime Minister, approved the Nutrient Based Subsidy (NBS) rates for Phosphatic and Potassic fertilizers for 2018-19. The subsidy rates per kilogram are set at Rs. 18.901 for Nitrogen, Rs. 15.216 for Phosphorus, Rs. 11.124 for Potash, and Rs. 2.722 for Sulphur. The expected subsidy expenditure for these fertilizers is Rs. 23,007.16 crore. The government aims to provide fertilizers at subsidized prices to farmers, increasing the subsidy by Rs. 1,913.07 crore from the previous year to mitigate rising international prices. 8. IBBI Notifies Amendments to The Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (Insolvency Professionals) Regulations, 2016 Summary: The Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (IBBI) has amended the Insolvency Professionals Regulations, 2016. Key changes include eligibility criteria for registration as an insolvency professional, requiring candidates to pass the Limited Insolvency Examination within the last year and complete a pre-registration course. Experienced individuals and those completing the Graduate Insolvency Programme are eligible for registration. Insolvency professionals must undergo continuing education and cannot outsource duties. Entities can be recognized as insolvency professional entities if they meet specific ownership and financial criteria. Professionals must disclose fees, and these amendments are effective from April 1, 2018. Notifications DGFT 1. 59/2015-2020 - dated 28-3-2018 - FTP Insertion of policy condition under Chapter 41, 42 and 43 of ITC (HS), 2017—Schedule—1(Import Policy) Summary: The Government of India, through the Directorate General of Foreign Trade, has issued Notification No. 59/2015-2020, dated March 28, 2018, amending the import policy under Chapters 41, 42, and 43 of the ITC (HS) 2017 Schedule-1. The policy condition prohibits the import of seal skin in any form. This amendment is enacted under the authority of Section 3 of the FT (D&R) Act, 1992, and aligns with the Foreign Trade Policy 2015-2020. 2. 58/2015-2020 - dated 28-3-2018 - FTP Amendment in Para 2.31 of Foreign Trade Policy, 2015-2020 Summary: The Central Government has amended the Foreign Trade Policy 2015-2020 by incorporating a new provision in Para 2.31. This provision allows the import of second-hand goods for repair, refurbishing, reconditioning, or re-engineering under a free import policy. However, it mandates that any waste generated during these processes must be treated according to domestic laws and regulations. Additionally, the refurbished items must be re-exported in compliance with the relevant Customs Notification. This amendment clarifies the import policy for second-hand goods intended for specific purposes. 3. 57/2015-2020 - dated 28-3-2018 - FTP Amendments in Foreign Trade policy 2015-2020, related to import of raw Sugar under DFIA scheme Summary: The Central Government of India has announced amendments to the Foreign Trade Policy 2015-2020 concerning the import of raw sugar under the Duty-Free Import Authorization (DFIA) scheme. The export of white sugar under DFIA is permitted until September 30, 2018, with DFIA issuance starting October 1, 2019, valid for imports until September 30, 2021. Additionally, no Duty-Free Import Authorization will be issued for inputs with pre-import conditions unless it pertains to raw sugar for exports made by September 30, 2018. These amendments are made under the authority of the FT (F&R) Act, 1992. GST 4. 20/2018 - dated 28-3-2018 - CGST Extension of due date for filing of application for refund under section 55 by notified agencies Summary: The Government of India extended the deadline for specified entities, including specialized UN agencies and foreign consulates, to apply for tax refunds under Section 55 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. Initially, these entities had six months from the end of the quarter in which supplies were received to file refund applications. The deadline has now been extended to eighteen months. This extension applies to taxes paid on inward supplies of goods or services. The application process is facilitated through a common portal, and submissions must be made to the jurisdictional tax authority. 5. 19/2018 - dated 28-3-2018 - CGST Extension of date for filing the return in FORM GSTR-6 Summary: The Government of India, through the Ministry of Finance and the Central Board of Excise and Customs, issued Notification No. 19/2018 on March 28, 2018, extending the deadline for Input Service Distributors to file returns in FORM GSTR-6. This extension covers the period from July 2017 to April 2018, with the new deadline set for May 31, 2018. This notification supersedes the earlier Notification No. 08/2018, dated January 23, 2018, except for actions already completed under it. 6. 18/2018 - dated 28-3-2018 - CGST Seeks to extend the due dates for the furnishing of FORM GSTR-1 for those taxpayers with aggregate turnover of more than ₹ 1.5 crores Summary: The Government of India, through the Ministry of Finance's Central Board of Excise and Customs, issued Notification No. 18/2018 on March 28, 2018, extending the deadline for taxpayers with an aggregate turnover of more than 1.5 crore rupees to file FORM GSTR-1. The new deadlines for filing are May 31, 2018, for April; June 10, 2018, for May; and July 10, 2018, for June. This extension is in accordance with the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, and further notifications regarding extensions for other forms will be published later. 7. 17/2018 - dated 28-3-2018 - CGST Seeks to prescribe the due date for quarterly furnishing of FORM GSTR-1 for those taxpayers with aggregate turnover of upto ₹ 1.5 crore Summary: The Government of India, through Notification No. 17/2018 - Central Tax dated March 28, 2018, prescribes that taxpayers with an aggregate turnover of up to 1.5 crore rupees must furnish their quarterly FORM GSTR-1 for the period of April to June 2018 by July 31, 2018. This notification was issued under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, and outlines a special procedure for such taxpayers. Further details regarding the extension of time limits for furnishing returns for this period will be notified in the Official Gazette. This notification was later superseded by Notification No. 43/2018 on September 10, 2018. GST - States 8. EXN-F(10)-14/2018-16/2018-State Tax - dated 27-3-2018 - Himachal Pradesh SGST Last date for filing of return in FORM GSTR-3B Summary: The Himachal Pradesh Excise and Taxation Department issued Notification No. 16/2018-State Tax, mandating that the GSTR-3B return for specified months be filed electronically via the common portal. The deadlines are April 2018 by May 20, 2018, May 2018 by June 20, 2018, and June 2018 by July 20, 2018. Registered persons must discharge their tax liabilities, including any interest, penalties, or fees, by debiting their electronic cash or credit ledger by the respective deadlines. This is in accordance with the Himachal Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and associated rules. 9. EXN-F(10)-14/2018-15/2018-State Tax - dated 27-3-2018 - Himachal Pradesh SGST Appoint the 1st day of April, 2018, as the date from which the provisions of sub-rule (ii) of rule 2, [other than clause (7)], (iii), (iv), (v), (vi) and (vii) of rule 2 of notification No. 12/2018–State Tax, dated the 22nd March, 2018, Summary: The Government of Himachal Pradesh, through the Excise and Taxation Department, has announced that the provisions of specific sub-rules of rule 2 from notification No. 12/2018-State Tax will take effect on April 1, 2018. This decision, under the authority of section 164 of the Himachal Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, excludes clause (7) of sub-rule (ii) but includes sub-rules (iii) to (vii). The notification was initially published in the Himachal Pradesh Gazette on March 24, 2018. 10. EXN-F(10)-14/2018-14/2018-State Tax - dated 27-3-2018 - Himachal Pradesh SGST The Himachal Pradesh Goods and Services Tax (Fourth Amendment) Rules, 2018. Summary: The Himachal Pradesh Goods and Services Tax (Fourth Amendment) Rules, 2018, amends the 2017 rules under the authority of the Himachal Pradesh GST Act, 2017. Key changes include modifications to rule 45 regarding the issuance and endorsement of challans for goods sent between job workers, amendments to rules 124, 125, 127, 129, 133, and 134 concerning procedural clarifications and roles within the Authority, and an explanation added after rule 138D about the exclusion of certain railway transport scenarios. These amendments aim to streamline GST processes and clarify responsibilities within the tax framework. 11. EXN-F(10)-14/2018-10/2018-State Tax (Rate) - dated 23-3-2018 - Himachal Pradesh SGST Amendment in the Notification of the Government of Himachal Pradesh, in the notification No. 8/2017 – State Tax (Rate), dated 30th June, 2017. Summary: The Government of Himachal Pradesh has amended Notification No. 8/2017 - State Tax (Rate), initially issued on June 30, 2017, under the Himachal Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The amendment, effective March 23, 2018, extends the deadline from March 31, 2018, to June 30, 2018. This change, made in the public interest and based on the Council's recommendations, is officially documented in Notification No. 10/2018-State Tax (Rate). The amendment was authorized by the Principal Secretary of the Excise and Taxation Department of Himachal Pradesh. 12. EXN-F(10)-14/2018-13/2018-State Tax - dated 22-3-2018 - Himachal Pradesh SGST Rescind the notification of the Government of Himachal Pradesh, No. 6/2018-State Tax, dated the 30th January, 2018. Summary: The Government of Himachal Pradesh has rescinded Notification No. 6/2018-State Tax, dated January 30, 2018, under the Himachal Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. This action, effective from March 22, 2018, is based on the recommendations of the Council and excludes actions taken or omitted prior to the rescission. The order was issued by the Principal Secretary of the Excise and Taxation Department. 13. EXN-F(10)-14/2018-12/2018-State Tax - dated 22-3-2018 - Himachal Pradesh SGST The Himachal Pradesh Goods and Services Tax (Third Amendment) Rules, 2018. Summary: The Himachal Pradesh Goods and Services Tax (Third Amendment) Rules, 2018, effective from March 22, 2018, amends the 2017 GST Rules. Key changes include updates to rule 117 regarding stock details submission in FORM GST TRAN 2, and a complete overhaul of rule 138 concerning the e-way bill system. The e-way bill must be generated for goods movements exceeding Rs. 50,000, with specific procedures for different transportation modes and scenarios. The amendment also introduces new forms for e-way bills and invoice references, and updates rules for document verification and detention reporting. Exemptions from e-way bill requirements are outlined for certain goods and conditions. 14. ACCT/TP/GST/Noti/500-516-40/2018 - dated 26-3-2018 - Jammu & Kashmir SGST Last date for filing of return in FORM GSTR.3B Summary: The Government of Jammu and Kashmir, through the Department of Commercial Taxes, has issued Notification No. 40 under the Jammu and Kashmir Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The notification specifies the deadlines for filing GSTR-3B returns for April, May, and June 2018 as May 20, June 20, and July 20, 2018, respectively. Registered persons must discharge their tax liabilities, including any interest, penalties, or fees, by debiting their electronic cash or credit ledger by the specified dates. This notification is effective from March 23, 2018. 15. SRO 122 - dated 5-3-2018 - Jammu & Kashmir SGST Reimbursement of Central Taxes for Promotion of Industries in the State of Jammu and Kashmir. Summary: The Government of Jammu and Kashmir issued a notification amending a previous directive (SRO 63 dated 21-12-2017) concerning budgetary support for manufacturing units through the reimbursement of Central Taxes to promote industries in the state. The amendment stipulates that eligible units must submit an application in the prescribed format for the period from July 2017 to December 2017. This application must be filed with the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes by April 15, 2018. This directive is effective from March 5, 2018, as ordered by the Principal Secretary to the Government, Finance Department. 16. SRO GST 31-(Rate) - dated 29-1-2018 - Jammu & Kashmir SGST Amendment in Notification No. SRO-GST-13 DATED 08.07.2017 Summary: The Government of Jammu and Kashmir has amended Notification No. SRO-GST-13 dated 08.07.2017 under the Jammu and Kashmir Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The amendment, effective from January 25, 2018, introduces a new entry in the notification's table concerning services provided by government entities through renting immovable property to registered persons under the Act. Additionally, a clause defining "insurance agent" as per the Insurance Act, 1938, has been added. These changes are enacted under the authority granted by section 9, subsection (3) of the Act, based on the Council's recommendations. 17. SRO GST 30-(Rate) - dated 29-1-2018 - Jammu & Kashmir SGST Amendment in Notification No. SRO -GST-12 DATED 08/07/2017 Summary: The Government of Jammu and Kashmir issued amendments to Notification No. SRO-GST-12 dated 08/07/2017 under the Jammu and Kashmir Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. Key changes include the addition of "Government Entity" alongside "Governmental Authority" in certain provisions, new entries for composite supply of goods and services, and exemptions for specific services such as transportation of goods by aircraft or vessel until September 30, 2018. Adjustments were made to service exemptions for educational institutions, life insurance, reinsurance, financial services in SEZs, and fumigation services. The notification is effective from January 25, 2018. 18. 10/2018 - dated 23-3-2018 - Karnataka SGST Amendment in the Government of Karnataka Notification (8/2017) No. FD 48 CSL 2017, dated the 29th June, 2017. Summary: The Government of Karnataka has issued an amendment to the notification No. FD 48 CSL 2017, initially dated June 29, 2017, under the Karnataka Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. This amendment, effective as of March 23, 2018, extends the deadline mentioned in the original notification from March 31, 2018, to June 30, 2018. The change is made in the public interest based on the recommendations of the Council. The amendment is authorized by the Finance Department and issued under the name of the Governor of Karnataka. 19. 08/2018 - dated 23-3-2018 - Karnataka SGST Appoints the 1st day of April, 2018, as the date from Which the provisions of rules 2. [other than Clause (7)]3., 4., 5, 6. And 7. of notification (4-N/2017) No. FD 47 CSL 2017, dated the 15th March, 2018. Summary: The Government of Karnataka, exercising its authority under section 164 of the Karnataka Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, has designated April 1, 2018, as the effective date for implementing specific provisions of rules 2 (excluding Clause 7), 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7 of notification (4-N/2017) No. FD 47 CSL 2017. This notification, dated March 15, 2018, was published in the Karnataka Gazette, Extraordinary, Part-IVA number 455, on March 14, 2018. The order was issued by the Under Secretary to the Government, Finance Department, in the name of the Governor of Karnataka. 20. 01-C/2018 - dated 23-3-2018 - Karnataka SGST Seeks to prescribe the due dates for filing FORM GSTR-3B for the months of April to June, 2018. Summary: The notification from the Karnataka Department of Commercial Taxes specifies the due dates for filing FORM GSTR-3B for April to June 2018. According to the notification, returns for April, May, and June are due by May 20, June 20, and July 20, 2018, respectively. Tax liabilities must be settled by debiting the electronic cash or credit ledger by these dates, as per section 49 of the Karnataka Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The notification is issued under the authority of the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes in Karnataka. 21. 04-N/2017 - dated 15-3-2018 - Karnataka SGST The Karnataka Goods and Services Tax (Fourth Amendment) Rules, 2018. Summary: The Karnataka Goods and Services Tax (Fourth Amendment) Rules, 2018, introduced amendments to the Karnataka GST Rules, 2017. Key changes include the substitution of Rule 138, which mandates the generation of an e-way bill for the movement of goods exceeding a value of fifty thousand rupees. The e-way bill must be generated on the common portal and is required for various types of transport, including road, rail, air, and vessel. The amendment outlines procedures for generating, updating, and canceling e-way bills, and specifies exemptions and validity periods. Additional changes involve the verification of documents, inspection of goods, and the introduction of new forms related to e-way bills. 22. 07/2018 - dated 7-3-2018 - Karnataka SGST Rescinding notification No. 04/2018 - CT dated 23.01.2018. Summary: The Government of Karnataka, exercising its authority under section 128 of the Karnataka Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, has rescinded notification No. 04/2018, dated January 23, 2018. This action, effective as of March 7, 2018, was taken following recommendations from the Council. The rescission does not affect actions completed or omitted prior to this decision. The order was issued by the Finance Department under the authority of the Governor of Karnataka. IBC 23. No. IBBI/2017-18/GN/REG030 - dated 27-3-2018 - IBC Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (Insolvency Resolution Process for Corporate Persons) (Second Amendment) Regulations, 2018 Summary: The Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India issued the Second Amendment Regulations, 2018, for the Insolvency Resolution Process for Corporate Persons, effective April 1, 2018. Key changes include replacing "company secretaries" with "secretarial auditors" in Regulation 3, updating the definition of "expenses" in Regulations 33 and 34, and introducing new regulations for cost disclosure and identifying resolution applicants. Several forms related to the insolvency process were revised, including updates to claimant declarations and verifications. These amendments aim to refine the insolvency resolution framework under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. 24. No. IBBI/2017-18/GN/REG028 - dated 27-3-2018 - IBC Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (Liquidation Process) (Amendment) Regulations, 2018 Summary: The Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India issued amendments to the Liquidation Process Regulations, 2016, effective from April 1, 2018. Key changes include the definition of "liquidation cost," encompassing fees and costs payable to the liquidator and interest on interim finance. The term "company secretaries" is replaced with "secretarial auditors" in regulation 3. Additionally, regulation 32 now allows the sale of assets in parcels and introduces the option to sell the corporate debtor as a going concern. These amendments aim to refine the liquidation process under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. 25. IBBI/2017-18/GN/REG027 - dated 27-3-2018 - IBC Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (Insolvency Professionals) (Amendment) Regulations, 2018 Summary: The Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (IBBI) issued the 2018 Amendment Regulations for Insolvency Professionals, effective April 1, 2018. Key changes include updates to the syllabus and format of the Limited Insolvency Examination, qualifications for registration, and continuing education requirements. The amendment also outlines criteria for recognizing entities as insolvency professional entities, including net worth and ownership requirements. Additionally, insolvency professionals must disclose affiliations with financial creditors and fees. The amendment mandates compliance with new provisions by specific deadlines in 2018 and revises application forms and verification procedures for registration. 26. IBBI/2017-18/GN/REG 029 - dated 27-3-2018 - IBC INSOLVENCY AND BANKRUPTCY BOARD OF INDIA (INFORMATION UTILITIES (AMENDMENT) REGULATIONS, 2018 Summary: The Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India issued the Information Utilities (Amendment) Regulations, 2018, effective from April 1, 2018. These amendments modify the 2017 regulations by replacing references to the "National Company Law Tribunal Rules, 2016" with the "National Company Law Appellate Tribunal Rules, 2016" in regulation 42. Additionally, a new section, "PART II," is added to the Annexure of Form A in the Schedule. These changes are made under the authority granted by sections 196 and 240 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. Circulars / Instructions / Orders GST 1. Order No. 1 /2018 - dated 28-3-2018 Extension of date for submitting the statement in FORM GST TRAN-2 under rule 117(4)(b)(iii) of the Central Goods and Service Tax Rules, 2017 Summary: The Government of India, through the Ministry of Finance and the Central Board of Excise and Customs, has extended the deadline for submitting the statement in FORM GST TRAN-2 under rule 117(4)(b)(iii) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017. This extension, recommended by the Council and authorized by the Commissioner, allows submissions until June 30, 2018. DGFT 2. 69/2015-2020 - dated 28-3-2018 Amendments in Hand Book of Procedures 2015-2020, related to import of Raw Sugar under DFIA scheme Summary: The Director General of Foreign Trade has amended the Hand Book of Procedures 2015-2020 concerning the import of raw sugar under the Duty-Free Import Authorization (DFIA) scheme. Specifically, Para 4.54(d) has been revised to apply late cut provisions from Para 9.02 to DFIA, with a 12-month relaxation for late cut imposition on raw sugar exports under SION E52. Additionally, the export of white sugar under DFIA is permitted, subject to conditions outlined in the amended Para 4.25(c) of the Foreign Trade Policy. 3. 70/2015-2020 - dated 28-3-2018 Amendment in Para 2.54 of the Handbook of Procedures, 2015-2020 Summary: The public notice amends sub-paragraph (v)(ii) of Para 2.54 in the Handbook of Procedures, 2015-2020, extending the deadline for designated sea ports to install and operationalize Radiation Portal Monitors and Container Scanners. Previously set for March 31, 2018, the deadline is now extended to October 31, 2018. Ports including Chennai, Cochin, Ennore, and others must comply by this new date to continue importing un-shredded metallic scrap. Failure to meet the deadline will result in derecognition for import purposes from November 1, 2018. Customs 4. Instruction No. 5/2018 - dated 28-3-2018 Completion of Data Entry in DIGIT; Issuance of Show Cause Notices and Adjudication Orders through DIGIT Summary: The Central Board of Excise & Customs has mandated the completion of data entry in the DIGIT system for all customs formations by July 31, 2018, extending the original deadline due to practical difficulties. From April 1, 2018, all Show Cause Notices and adjudication orders must be issued through DIGIT, ensuring timely issuance. The Board, alongside the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence, will monitor compliance, and any failure to meet deadlines or use DIGIT for these processes will be taken seriously. This directive aims to maintain an up-to-date database for effective enforcement and risk management. 5. 51/2018 - dated 28-3-2018 SUB: Requirement of “NOC” from CDSCO port Office for export consignments of Drugs, Medical Devices & Cosmetics –reg. Summary: Exporters and custom brokers are informed that the Central Drugs Standard Control Organization (CDSCO) has updated its policy regarding the requirement of a No Objection Certificate (NOC) for exporting drugs, medical devices, and cosmetics. Previously, an NOC was not needed for exports to the USA, Canada, Japan, Australia, and the European Union. Now, this exemption extends to all countries if the shipping bills are filed by the manufacturer with a valid license under the Drugs and Cosmetics Act and Rules. Any issues should be reported to the Deputy/Assistant Commissioner in charge of Appraising Main (Export). 6. 49/2018 - dated 26-3-2018 Subject: - Procedure to be followed for “one time default intimation” to Shipping Lines by DPD importers at JNCH -Reg. Summary: The circular from the Commissioner of Customs at Jawaharlal Nehru Customs House outlines the procedure for DPD importers to submit a "one time default intimation" to shipping lines. This replaces the need for advance intimation with each vessel arrival. Importers must send this intimation to the CSLA and endorse a copy to the DPD Cell. Failure to follow the procedure or provide complete information will result in non-approval by Customs. Upon receipt, the DPD Cell will verify the details and communicate with CSLA for compliance. Any issues should be reported to the Additional Commissioner in charge of the DPD Cell. 7. 50/2018 - dated 26-3-2018 Subject: Refund of IGST on Export– Invoice mis-match Cases – Alternative Mechanism with Officer Interface -reg. Summary: The Customs Office at Jawaharlal Nehru Custom House has extended the alternative mechanism for processing IGST refunds in cases of invoice mismatch to include shipping bills filed up to February 28, 2018. Exporters must email a concordance table mapping GST invoices to shipping bill invoices to the designated Deputy Commissioner of Customs. Physical visits to the office are not necessary, though exporters may visit the IGST Refund Camp if desired. Any issues should be reported to the Deputy Commissioner of Customs, Drawback, NS-II, at the provided contact details. 8. 47/2018 - dated 23-3-2018 Subject: Amendment in the Authorized Economic Operator (AEO) Programme Circular No. 33/2016 dated 22/7/2016 – reg. Summary: The circular announces amendments to the Authorized Economic Operator (AEO) Programme as per Circular No. 33/2016, updated by Circular No. 3/2018. It addresses Custom House Agents, exporters, importers, and others in the international supply chain, urging them to submit applications to the Nodal Officer-AEO at the Jawaharlal Nehru Custom House. Contact details for further inquiries are provided, designating a Joint Commissioner and Deputy Commissioner as points of contact. The instructions are to be treated as a standing order for officers and staff. 9. 48 /2018 - dated 23-3-2018 Subject: EGM related errors – Amendment of No. of container mismatch & container no. mismatch in EGM filed at ICDs – reg. Summary: Exporters, agents, export promotion councils, and shipping lines are informed about amendments related to errors in the Export General Manifest (EGM) filed at Inland Container Depots (ICDs). If Integrated Goods and Services Tax (IGST) refunds are delayed due to errors (code 'SB006'), exporters or their representatives can contact the EGM Coordination Cell at Jawaharlal Nehru Custom House (JNCH) with necessary documents for error correction. To ease document submission, scanned copies can now be emailed to the specified address. Other conditions from Facility Notice No. 43/2018 remain unchanged, and any implementation issues should be reported immediately. Highlights / Catch Notes GST Quarterly GSTR-1 Submission Deadlines Set for Small Taxpayers with Turnover Up to Rs. 1.5 Crore to Ease Compliance. Notifications : Seeks to prescribe the due date for quarterly furnishing of FORM GSTR-1 for those taxpayers with aggregate turnover of upto ₹ 1.5 crore - Notification Visit to Get Source GSTR-1 Filing Deadline Extended for Taxpayers with Turnover Over Rs. 1.5 Crores. Notifications : Extension of the due dates for the furnishing of FORM GSTR-1 for those taxpayers with aggregate turnover of more than ₹ 1.5 crores - Notification Visit to Get Source Deadline Extended for Filing FORM GSTR-6 Under GST: Ensure Compliance with New Date. Notifications : Extension of date for filing the return in FORM GSTR-6 - Notification Visit to Get Source Deadline Extended for Agencies to File Refund Applications u/s 55 of GST Notification. Notifications : Extension of due date for filing of application for refund u/s 55 by notified agencies - Notification Visit to Get Source Court Declines to Direct Respondents on Including Petrol and Diesel Under GST as Requested by Petitioner. Case-Laws - HC : Levy of GST - Petrol and Diesel - case of petitioner is that the petroleum and diesel should be brought forthwith within the ambit of Goods and Service Tax - this Court is not in a position to issue any positive direction to the respondents to consider the prayer sought for by the petitioner. - HC Visit to Get Source Income Tax Section 68 Addition Overturned: No Business Income, No Books of Account; Passbook Not Recognized as Book of Account. Case-Laws - AT : Since the assessee had no business income, no books of account were maintained and the addition was made only on the basis of the assessee’s pass book, which is not a book of account; that as such, the addition made under section 68 of the Act is not sustainable - AT Visit to Get Source Assessing Officers must justify deviations from previous year's approach; res judicata doesn't apply, but consistency does. Case-Laws - AT : It is true that principles of res judicata do not apply to income tax proceedings, but principles of consistency apply. So, if an AO wants to deviate from the path followed in the earlier year, he has to give reasons for it. - AT Visit to Get Source Customs Tribunal Questions Import Ban on Goods Misdeclared for Industrial Use but Used as Animal Feed; FSSAI Certificate Issues Unresolved. Case-Laws - HC : Confiscation - mis-declaration of goods - FSSAI certificate - Tribunal posed a specific query to the Departmental Representative whether there was any prohibition for import of the goods for industrial use but to be consumed as animal feed, he could not point out anything beyond stating that they are not fit for human consumption. This definitely was not the answer to the query of the Tribunal. - HC Visit to Get Source EOU's Debonding Issues: No Duty Evasion Intent Found, Penalties and Confiscation Demands Deemed Unwarranted. Case-Laws - HC : 100% EOU - debonding obligation - not achieving value addition - Once the element of intention to evade duty is absent and as a matter of fact there is no such allegation in the SCN, demand of duty, confiscation of capital goods and imposition of penalty ought not to have been fastened on the respondent. - HC Visit to Get Source Appellant Faces Duty Demand After Rejected Mobile and TV Components Cleared as Scrap at Uttarakhand Factory. Case-Laws - AT : Concessional rate of duty - appellant has imported components at concessional rate of duty for manufacture of mobile phone and LED/LCD televisions at their factory in Uttarakhand - goods were rejected and cleared them as scrap - demand confirmed - AT Visit to Get Source DGFT New Import Regulations for Second-Hand Goods: Guidelines for Repair, Refurbishing, and Reconditioning Ensuring Safety and Compliance. Notifications : Import policy for Second Hand Goods imported for the purpose of repair / refurbishing / re- conditioning or re- engineering is laid down. Visit to Get Source India Updates Import Policy for Seal Skin Under ITC (HS) 2017 Chapters 41, 42, and 43. Notifications : Import policy of seal skin under Chapter 41, 42 and 43 of ITC (HS), 2017-Schedule-1 (Import Policy) is notified. Visit to Get Source Indian Laws Cabinet Approves Expansion of Pradhan Mantri Rojgar Protsahan Yojana to Boost Job Creation and Support Economic Growth. News : Cabinet approves enhancing the coverage of Pradhan Mantri Rojgar Protsahan Yojana Visit to Get Source IBBI amends Insolvency Professionals Regulations, 2016 to boost compliance and efficiency in insolvency proceedings. News : IBBI Notifies Amendments to The Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (Insolvency Professionals) Regulations, 2016 Visit to Get Source Supreme Court Rules on Arbitral Award Validity: Family Representative's Acceptance Binds All Members to Time Limits. Case-Laws - SC : Validity of Arbitral Award - time limitation - Having accepted the award through Anilkumar Patel, being the head of the family, appellant Nos. 1(a) to 1(d) and respondent No.10 cannot turn round and contend that they had not received the copy of the award - SC Visit to Get Source High Court Rules ICAI Member Not Aggrieved in Case Against Cost Accountants for 'ICAI' Acronym Use. Case-Laws - HC : A Member of Institute of Chartered Accountants of India (ICAI) can not be said as aggrieved person against the Institute of Cost Accountants of India for using the acronym 'ICAI' - HC Visit to Get Source IBC Insolvency Code Bars Tribunal from Intervening in District Disaster Management Authority Actions on FDD Sinking in Goa. Case-Laws - Tri : Bar of jurisdiction under Insolvency & Bankruptcy Code - action by District Disaster Management Authority sinking FDD - impact on the corporate debtors - Tribunal is barred to interfere with the jurisdiction exercised by the Collector of Goa. Visit to Get Source Service Tax Appellants Not Intermediaries u/r 2(f), Exempt from Service Tax as Providers in India Per Rule 9, 2012 Rules. Case-Laws - AT : Place of provision of services - The appellant are not intermediaries in terms of Rule 2(f) of the Place of Provision of Service Rules, 2012. Therefore, the appellants are not liable to pay service tax being provider of service in India in terms of Rule 9 of the Place of Provision of Service Rules, 2012. - AT Visit to Get Source Service Tax Act exempts services in Jammu & Kashmir, including GTA services under reverse charge mechanism. No service tax obligations apply. Case-Laws - AT : Scope of Service Tax Act - State of Jammu and Kashmir - GTA Service - reverse charge mechanism - no provision related to Service Tax Law is applicable to services rendered in the state of Jammu & Kashmir - AT Visit to Get Source Central Excise Interest Calculation in Central Excise: Nullified Orders Require Fresh Adjudication; No Interest Due Until Final Order Issued. Case-Laws - HC : Interest - relevant date for calculation of interest - Setting aside an order means there is no order and party relegated for fresh adjudication. Stage of adjudication cannot be said to be determination. An adjudication will culminate in an order and such order would be determination and/or ascertainment of duty, and no interest is payable - HC Visit to Get Source Discharge Certificate Required for CENVAT Credit Under VCES Scheme to Avoid Time Limitations. Case-Laws - AT : VCES Scheme - time limitation - CENVAT credit - As such, it was necessary, under the scheme, to receive the discharge certificate before availing the credit, in which case, even limitation would not get involved. - AT Visit to Get Source VAT Reassessment Order Invalid Without Pre-existing Assessment Order Under VAT Act's Section 22(1. Case-Laws - HC : Validity of order of reassessment - in order to invoke jurisdiction u/s 22(1) of the VAT Act or to initiate proceedings for reassessment there must be an order of assessment duly passed by the assessing officer and it must be in existence as a condition precedent to invoke Section 22(1) - there is no deeming fiction under the act - reassessment order is invalid - HC Visit to Get Source Case Laws: GST 2018 (3) TMI 1453 Release of detained goods - Rule 140(1) of the Kerala GST Rules, 2017 - Held that: - The writ petition is disposed of directing the competent authority to complete the adjudication provided for under Section 129 of the statutes - It is also directed that if the petitioner complies with Rule 140(1) of the Kerala Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017, the goods detained shall be released to them forthwith. 2018 (3) TMI 1452 Detention of goods - Section 129 of the CGST as also the Kerala State Goods and Services Tax Act - Held that: - it is for the petitioner to raise those grounds before the detaining authority itself at the first instance. In the said view of the matter, the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondent to complete the adjudication provided for under Section 129 of the statutes - petition disposed off. 2018 (3) TMI 1451 Levy of GST - Petrol and Diesel - case of petitioner is that the petroleum and diesel should be brought forthwith within the ambit of Goods and Service Tax, so that the selling price would drastically reduce and as a consequence, the prices of the Goods and essential commodities would come down, which would ultimately benefit to the common people, especially poor and down trodden. Whether this Court in exercise of its Jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India can issue any positive direction to the Goods and Central Services Tax council to bring petrol and diesel prices within the ambit of Goods and Service Tax? Held that:- In the considered opinion of this Court, it cannot issue any direction for the reason that it is for the Goods and Service Tax council to take a call in that aspect and Section 9(2) of the Act also deals with the Central Tax on the supply of petroleum crude, high speed diesel, motor spirit (commonly known as petrol), natural gas and aviation turbine fuel - The Goods and Service Tax council is having representation of the State Governments also and therefore, their views have also to be elicited, before the Goods and Service Tax council take a call as to bring the petrol and diesel prices within the ambit of Goods and Service Tax. It is a well-settled position of law that it is not for the Court to determine whether a particular policy or particular decision taken in the fulfillment of that policy is fair. It is only concerned with the manner in which those decisions have been taken and the extent of the duty to act fairly will vary from case to case. It is for the Central Government to act on the recommendations of the Goods and Service Tax council as to bring the petroleum and diesel prices within the ambit of the Goods and Service Tax, this Court is not in a position to issue any positive direction to the respondents to consider the prayer sought for by the petitioner. Petition dismissed - decided against petitioner. 2018 (3) TMI 1450 Detention of goods - it was alleged that there was no nexus between the documents accompanied and actual goods under transport - Held that: - Intelligence Inspector shall made a fresh assessment recomputing the value of the goods and shall compute the CGST and SGST payable together with penalty. On payment of 50% of such demand along with execution of a simple bond for the balance amounts, the goods shall be released - petition disposed off. Income Tax 2018 (3) TMI 1470 Seeking refund of the TDS deposited - Held that:- As the matter is pending scrutiny before the competent officer at this stage exercising the discretion under Section 143(1d) of the Income Tax Act, no mandamus can be issued by this Court in the matter. The petitioner may approach the competent authority of the department furnishing all information and we direct the department to complete the scrutiny assessment and thereafter proceed to consider the question of refund in accordance with law. We dispose of the writ petition with liberty to the petitioner to approach the authority when the matter is pending for scrutiny assessment. 2018 (3) TMI 1469 Penalty under section 271D - assessee has violated section 269 SS as accepted deposits over Rs. 20,000/in cash - Held that:- In case of Shivaji Ramchandra Pawar (2018 (2) TMI 1467 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT), this court had observed that mere fact that a party accepts loans in cash which are otherwise explainable would not absolve a party from penalty under section 271 D of the Act in absence of a reasonable cause. In the present matter it has been observed by the Commissioner (Appeals) and the Tribunal concurrently that the auditor of the respondent advised that Section 269SS of the Act are not applicable to the assessee on the ground that assessee's business is akin to the bank. CIT(Appeals) and Tribunal observed that it is based on the advise of the Auditor. The assessee believed the advice and it can not be said that the assessee's bona fide belief was genuine and honest.Section 271D is a penalty proceedings. The Tribunal and the Commissioner (Appeals) concurrently appreciated the explanation given and found the explanation to be within the purview of reasonable cause. No substantial question of law arises. 2018 (3) TMI 1468 Reopening of assessment - notice was not issued within the time limit - Held that:- Permanent Account Numbers issued. The notices were dispatched at the address which was available in the system of the department. The petitioner had never applied for change of address and, therefore, the department was obviously not aware about it. These are disputed questions of facts. Whether the system of the department contains the petitioner's old address as declared by him earlier and, therefore, the department was correct in sending the notice to such address would need proper examination. The petitioner's contention that without the change of the address, the system would not accept the petitioner's returns declaring new address also cannot be brushed aside. These are issues we are not inclined to go in a writ petition. These issues need to be gone into in the departmental proceedings in regular assessments. The authorities would have sufficient time and opportunity to examine such disputed questions. 2018 (3) TMI 1467 Addition u/s 68 - addition on account of sundry creditors - genuineness of the transactions - creditors did not respond to the notices issued u/s. 133(6) by the AO - Held that:- The assessee had at the outset, contrary to what was observed by the Assessing Officer, supplied necessary details of all transactions and persons with whom such transactions were made. Wherever there was lack of response from these persons during the assessment, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) believed the genuineness of the transactions on the basis of the remand report called for during the appellate proceedings. The issues are thus, purely factual in nature. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and the Tribunal concurrently held that the additions under section 68 were incorrectly made - no question of law arise - Decided against revenue 2018 (3) TMI 1466 Imposition of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - deliberate claim of loss of sale though the same was not an actual state of affairs - reason given by the assessee that the assessee was advised by the Chartered Accountant - Held that:- The Tribunal in its order relied on the Judgment of the Apex Court in a case of Dilip N. Shroff Vs. JCIT and another (2007 (5) TMI 198 - SUPREME Court) and observed that there has to be a conscious concealment on the part of the assessee and that a mistake in not returning any income by itself would not constitute reason enough for imposition of penalty. The Tribunal has accepted the contention of the assessee on the basis of the affidavit filed by the Chartered Accountant / advisor that he gave wrong advise and the situation were explained about the bona-fide error being committed with regard to the applicability of the provision of law. The benefit was claimed on the basis of the deleted provision wherein the assessee had debited the amount to the profit and loss account on account of loss of sale of vehicles. The assessee was not entitled for it as it was not engaged in driving of vehicles. It would also be clear that the survey was made only on 10th February, 2004 and on the basis of the same the matters were taken up for assessment years 1999-2000, 2000-2001, 2001-2002, 2002-2003 and 2003-2004. The Tribunal on merits has taken a plausible view. No substantial question of law. 2018 (3) TMI 1465 TP adjustment - notional interest on outstanding receivables chargeability - Held that:- Notional interest on outstanding receivables is not chargeable and no TP adjustment can be made. See Pegasystems Worldwide Versus ACIT [2015 (10) TMI 2495 - ITAT HYDERABAD] Working capital adjustment takes into consideration the interest on the receivables as well. Therefore, on this ground also, no TP adjustment is required. See case of Kusum Healthcare Pvt Ltd.[2017 (4) TMI 1254 - DELHI HIGH COURT] 2018 (3) TMI 1464 Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - treating declaration as Long term Capital gains as wrong and erroneous - bonafide belief -sale consideration received against sale of furniture, being the solitary transaction, would be treated as income from other sources and not capital gain - contention of the assessee has been that it was done under the bonafide belief that the furniture and fixtures sold with the building partake the character of sale consideration of capital asset - Held that:- The bonafide of the assessee appears to have not been considered by the ld. Authorities below in right perspective. At the initial stage of quantum proceedings, there were two different opinions of the Revenue authorities itself on this issue, inasmuch as the Assessing Officer treated the impugned sum as income from other sources whereas the ld. CIT(A) in first round of appeal by the assessee treated the same amount as income from long-term capital gain. Once, the Revenue Authorities had expressed two views on the same issue, how the bonafide of the assessee to show the said amount as income from long term capital gains could be doubted by the Authorities below. However, the fact remains, that the assessee had declared all particulars of the impugned receipts before the Revenue authorities. Mere making of a claim not found sustainable under law, the same would not amount to concealment of income or furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income for saddling penalty against the assessee as held by Hon’ble Apex Court in Reliance Petroproducts (2010 (3) TMI 80 - SUPREME COURT). It is also notable that there is no comments of the authorities below on declaration of the impugned amount in the return of income, though it was shown under different. Only the head of income has been changed by the Assessing Officer. There being no concealment of the impugned sale consideration on the part of assessee, not a fit case to impose penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) - Decided in favour of assessee 2018 (3) TMI 1463 Disallowance of expenses as discounts allowed, forwarding expenses and quality difference - application of GP rate @ 2% on total turnover - assessee submitted as losses in the business - Held that:- Where the assessee had not originally filed its return of loss, then the plea of assessee that it had incurred losses is not backed by any evidence whatsoever. The year under appeal is assessment year 2010-11 i.e. financial year 2009-10 and the assessee has not filed any evidence of the loss of the year at Rs. 15,32,732/- as mentioned in the statement of facts. Even the books of account evidencing the same were not available with the assessee. The assessee had admittedly computerized books of account in September, 2012 in which the loss has been worked out to Rs. 15,32,732/-. The auditor has signed the said accounts on 28.09.2012 i.e. much after the due date of signing and filing the audit report for the year ending 31.03.2010. Such book results shown by the assessee cannot be relied to compute the income in the hands of assessee. Accordingly, we uphold the order of CIT(A) in applying the GP rate to determine the income in the hands of assessee. The provisions of section 145 of the Act are squarely attracted. However, we direct the Assessing Officer to apply GP rate at 1% on the total turnover of Rs. 11.83 crores in order to determine the income in the hands of assessee. - Decided partly in favour of assessee 2018 (3) TMI 1462 Addition u/s 68 - assessment u/s 153A - Held that:- Since the assessee had no business income, no books of account were maintained and the addition was made only on the basis of the assessee’s pass book, which is not a book of account; that as such, the addition made under section 68 of the Act is not sustainable. See ‘CIT vs. Bhaichand H. Gandhi’ (1982 (2) TMI 28 - BOMBAY High Court) - It is undisputed that the addition was made only on the basis of the assessee’s bank pass book, which is not sustainable in law. - Decided in favour of assessee Addition under the head Income from House Property - ALV determination - Held that:- It is seen that the provisions of section 23(4) (b) of the Act stipulate that where the property consists of more than one house, the annual value thereof shall be determine under section 23(1), as if such property had been let out. It has also been so held in ‘Dr. Prabha Sanghi’, (2013 (1) TMI 18 - ITAT DELHI). In accordance with the same, the grievance by way of the ground no.1 is accepted. The addition is deleted. 2018 (3) TMI 1461 Depreciation of assets acquired by assessee trust - the capital expenditure is treated as application of income for charitable purposes - Held that:- The income of the Trust is required to be computed under section 11on commercial principles after providing for allowance for normal depreciation and deduction thereof from gross income of the Trust. Also it also follows that once assessee is allowed depreciation, he shall be entitled to carry forward the depreciation as well. See CIT III, Pune Versus Rajasthan And Gujarati Charitable Foundation Poona [2017 (12) TMI 1067 - SUPREME COURT] - Decided in favour of assessee 2018 (3) TMI 1460 Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - non specification of charge - Held that:- AO has initiated the penalty for concealment of particulars of income or furnishing of inaccurate particulars, which is contrary to the provisions of law. I am of the view that notice issued by the AO u/s. 271(1)(c) read with Section 274 of the Act is bad in law as it does not specify which limb of section 271(1)(c) of the Act, the penalty proceedings had been initiated i.e. whether for concealment of particulars of income or furnishing of inaccurate particulars. Therefore, the penalty in dispute is not sustainable in the eyes of law, hence, cancel the penalty in dispute. See CIT & Anr. Vs. M/s SSA’s Emerald Meadows – 2015 (11) TMI 1620 – Karnataka High Court - Decided in favour of assessee. 2018 (3) TMI 1459 Disallowance u/s 40A(3) - payment to suppliers in cash - Held that:- The assessee had produced all the bills, cash memos and money receipts of the payees before the lower authorities. Though the assessee had not established the circumstances which warranted it to pay the suppliers in cash by any cogent evidence, it had filed an affidavit duly notarized and signed by the partner of the assessee firm clearly deposing that the cash payments had to be made on the insistence of the suppliers and their refusal to accept the cheques. It was also pleaded that all the suppliers are duly registered with sales tax authorities and having PAN. This affidavit has been filed by the assessee only before us for the first time. The contents of the affidavit requires examination by the lower authorities and hence in the interest of justice and fairplay, we deem it fit and appropriate, to remand this issue to the file of the ld AO to decided it afresh - Decided in favour of assessee for statistical purposes. 2018 (3) TMI 1458 Revision u/s 263 - Addition of share capital and share premium by treating the same as unexplained cash credit under section 68 - denial of natural justice - Held that:- A perusal of the assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer also shows that the reason for non-compliance to the notices issued under section 131 on the part of Mr. M.K. Kedia and Mrs. Sarita Devi Kedia, the then two directors of the assessee company was explained by them as due to change in address and a further opportunity was also sought by them in writing to comply with the requirements of the A.O. It appears from the order of the A.O. that he did not give such opportunity to Mr. M.K. Kedia and Mrs. Sarita Devi Kedia in spite of the fact that their examination was very crucial to decide the issue and a specific direction accordingly was given by the Ld. CIT in the order under section 263 to the A.O. to examine them on oath. The assessment under section 147/143(3)/263/143(3) was made by the A.O. without giving proper and sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee and without considering the relevant documentary evidence filed by the concerned share applicants in response to notices under section 133(6). Set aside the orders of the authorities below and restore the matter to the file of the A.O. with the direction to complete the assessment afresh - Decided in favour of assessee for statistical purpose. 2018 (3) TMI 1457 Advance received against the unsold stock far exceeded the cost - Addition of advances were more than closing WIP - Held that:- AO had worked gross profit on work in progress which meant that the gross profit was determined from the expenses which was pending to be allowed. Without allowing corresponding expenses, the AO should not taxed the income portion of the transaction. A perusal of Schedule 7 reveal as to the current liability of Rs. Rs. 3, 18, 50, 717/- was explained. Both the departmental authorities did not consider the calculation or ignored it. There is no evidence that that the net advance was not Rs. 6, 70, 50, 365/-, as claimed by the assessee in the Schedule 7. The figure adopted by the AO/FAA at Rs. 3, 18, 50, 717/- under the head net advance was factually incorrect. If the net advance was of Rs. 6. 70 crores then same was lower than the closing WIP of Rs. 7. 31 crores. The sole basis of making the addition was that advances were more than closing WIP. Considering these facts we are of the opinion that matter needs further verification and correct appreciation of facts. It is true that principles of res judicata do not apply to income tax proceedings, but principles of consistency apply. So, if an AO wants to deviate from the path followed in the earlier year, he has to give reasons for it. We do not find any such reasons in the assessment order - the matter should be restored back to the file of the FAA for fresh adjudication Addition on account of variation in sale prices - Held that:- FAA, after considering the available material, held that even after considering the date of booking, there was inexplicable variations in the rate per square feet shown by the appellant. He referred to some of the sale transactions where variation in the rates was found. He observed that in several cases the rate per sq. ft. as per agreement was lower than stamp duty value, that large variations in rates indicated that sales realization was under reported, that the assessee was showing losses year after year. Finally, he upheld the additions, made by the AO, ‘in principle’. But, he directed the AO to consider only the additional area area and rate of Rs. 5040 sq. ft. stated in the agreement in two cases while computing the addition - we direct the FAA to decide the issue of addition made on account of variation in sale price of office premises afresh after hearing the assessee 2018 (3) TMI 1456 Rectification of mistake - Rectificatory powers vested on the Tribunal under section 254(2) - Observations that actual use of loan by the appellant after borrowing it is not verified by the lower tax authorities - Held that:- This Tribunal cannot be a reviewing authority. We find that this Tribunal had considered all the aspects of the case before giving its finding. What the assessee seeks now is a review of the order. Assessee has not been able to show any mistake in the order of the Tribunal, much less any mistake apparent on record. The stand of the assessee is this that it was stop gap arrangement till the loan is disbursed by the financial institutions as stated by the assessee in Para 4 (ii) of the M. P. As per the assessment order, the entire discussion is about allowability of deduction u/s 57 and there is no whisper about nature of loan. There is no discussion on this aspect also as to whether loan was received from financial institutions and if received than when received and how utilised. As per the tribunal order, the matter is restored to AO for fresh decision after examining the facts of the present case in the light of the judgment rendered in the case of Comfound financial Services [2007 (12) TMI 519 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT]. Hence, in our considered opinion, there is no apparent mistake in this tribunal order which can be rectified u/s 254 (2). 2018 (3) TMI 1449 Exemption u/s 11 - religious purpose/charitable purpose - Assessee was not using its funds for public benefit but rather for the benefit of specified persons under Section 13(3) - Held That:- SLP dismissed. HC order confirmed [2017 (9) TMI 532 - DELHI HIGH COURT] Activities of the Assessee Society, though both religious and charitable, were not exclusively meant for one particular religious community. It was, therefore, rightly not denied exemption under Section 11 of the Act. - Decided against the revenue. 2018 (3) TMI 1448 Disallowance of expenditure in respect of interest and administrative expenses under Section 14A - Disallowance of expenditure incurred towards foreign exchange gain - Held that:- SLP dismissed. HC order confirmed [2017 (5) TMI 1160 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT] HC has correctly held that the assessee was already having its own surplus fund and that too to the extent of Rs. 2319.17 Crores against which investment was made of Rs. 111.09 Crores, there was no question of making any disallowance of expenditure in respect of interest and administrative expenses under Section 14A of the Act, therefore, there was no question of any estimation of expenditure in respect of interest and administrative expenses of Rs. 54,39,916/= under rule 8D. For expenditure incurred towards foreign exchange gain the assessee had incurred loss in the same account in the earlier assessment years as well as subsequent assessment year and the treatment given by the assessee has been accepted. Therefore, the learned CIT [A] as well as the Tribunal has rightly deleted the disallowance made on account of foreign gain. - Decided against revenue. 2018 (3) TMI 1447 Estimation of income - Determination of NPR - rejection of books for non-maintenance of stock register coupled with payment of expenses on self made vouchers - Held that:- The 8% NPR confirmed by the ld. CIT(A) was applied by the AO has observed (Para 4 of the assessment order) that the net profit rate shown by the assessee was 6.7%, whereas, actually, it was shown at 5.01%. Though the ld. CIT(A) took due note (impugned order, para 6.1) of this actual NPR shown by the assessee, he maintained the net profit rate of 8% as applied by the AO. Considering the past history in the assessee’s own case, the AO is directed to apply a net profit rate of 2.65% and the addition is directed to be reduced accordingly. 2018 (3) TMI 1446 CIT(A) power in directing the AO (TDS) to re-examine the rectification petition of the assessee - Held that:- We note that though the Ld. CIT(A) has got the power to confirm, reduce, enhance or annul the assessment, the power to set aside/remand to the AO has not been given to the Ld. CIT(A), therefore, we set aside the order of Ld. CIT(A) and in the interest of justice, remand the matter to the file of the AO and direct the AO to de novo adjudicate the issues raised by the assessee in the rectification petition filed by the assessee u/s. 154 of the Act on 14.04.2011 untramelled by any observations given while explaining the facts - the assessee may be given adequate opportunity of being heard before passing the speaking order. Appeal of revenue is allowed for statistical purposes. Customs 2018 (3) TMI 1445 Confiscation - mis-declaration of goods - suspicion was that the consignment may contain the goods fit for human consumption, which has not been declared while filing the bill of entry in order to evade higher custom duty and a mandatory no objection certificate of the FSSAI - Held that: - The issue raised by Revenue revolves on suspicion that these goods would be passed off as goods certified to be fit for industrial use/animal consumption but would be consumed in preparing sweets etc., which would be detrimental to the safety of those consuming them. It is on this basis that the samples were drawn and they were forwarded to the laboratory. The laboratory on examination of the same certified that the goods are an animal feed and not for human consumption. It is in these circumstances that consistent with the declaration of the assessee, the Tribunal concluded that factually the FSSAI certificate would not be necessary - In the light of the fact that consignment has not been misdeclared, there was no scope for any confiscation. Further the Tribunal posed a specific query to the Departmental Representative whether there was any prohibition for import of the goods for industrial use but to be consumed as animal feed, he could not point out anything beyond stating that they are not fit for human consumption. This definitely was not the answer to the query of the Tribunal. Appeal dismissed. 2018 (3) TMI 1444 Attachment/freezing of Bank Account - Section 142 of the Customs Act, 1962 - smuggling of Gold - petitioner states that no show cause notice as yet has been issued. There is no crystalization of the amount due and payable to the Government - Held that: - If it is a serious allegation and made on oath before us, then, least we expected that by now a show cause notice to be issued, the petitioner's reply called for, an opportunity of personal hearing and an order of adjudication. Leave alone any adjudication order till date, no show cause notice is also issued to the petitioner. The Revenue prays for time to issue such a notice. We do not see how in these circumstances the Revenue justifies this act and prayed that bank account may be continued under attachment and then within a time frame show cause notice will be issued. Petition allowed - decided against Revenue. 2018 (3) TMI 1443 100% EOU - debonding obligation - not achieving value addition - Whether the order of confiscation of the capital goods and imposition of penalty was fully justified in the facts and circumstances of the case? - Whether the Tribunal erred in law in setting aside the order of confiscation of the capital goods and imposition of the penalty against the respondent? - Held that: - It always remained open for the authority to refuse debonding and at the same time initiate action for payment of duty which the respondent was exempted at the time of import of capital goods for the EOU Unit. The resultant effect of allowing de-bonding and holding that value addition has been achieved by the respondent is that there was no willful attempt to evade duty by importing duty free goods for EOU without ever intending to operate and manufacture the goods in the EOU Unit. Once the element of intention to evade duty is absent and as a matter of fact there is no such allegation in the SCN, demand of duty, confiscation of capital goods and imposition of penalty ought not to have been fastened on the respondent. It is not a laconic order or perfunctory in that sense of the term which has not dealt with the facts and law applicable. Confiscation and penalty set aside - decided against Revenue. 2018 (3) TMI 1442 Seizure of amounts lying to the credit of the petitioner's bank account - Held that: - Resultantly, the parties who are involved and allegedly in fraudulent transactions move this Court and complain as in this case that more than two years have lapsed, but, none of the Authorities have set the law in motion. This Court may then be inclined to release the bank account from seizure or an order of freezing the same - petition disposed off. 2018 (3) TMI 1441 Mis-declaration of imported goods - pesticides/ insecticides /fungicides - Held that: - it appears that undoubtedly the appellant has mis-declared the imported goods as limestone powder instead of pesticides/ insecticides/ fungicides which attract higher rate of duty. The appellant was well aware about the contents of the container, because one of the container was already released. It appears that it is first offence of the appellant and he accepted his guilt before the lower authorities - Quantum of penalty reduced. Appeal allowed in part. 2018 (3) TMI 1440 Concessional rate of duty - appellant has imported components at concessional rate of duty for manufacture of mobile phone and LED/LCD televisions at their factory in Uttarakhand - goods were rejected and cleared them as scrap - Held that: - these components have not been used for manufacture of the finished goods and hence, as per Rule 8 of the 1996 Rules, the demand was raised by the department. The goods were initially consumed and after assembly, tested and found defective, When the goods were not of the quality that can be re-exported so that it gets out of production. There was no provision under which the appellant can claim the benefit - appeal dismissed. 2018 (3) TMI 1439 Application for change of name - jurisdiction - Held that: - it is observed that the inquiry was conducted by the Customs Department from the Income Tax Department of Mumbai, whereas the applicant's PAN was issued from Dehradun. Therefore, the inquiry made by the department is of no meaning as the same was not done with the appropriate authority. Change of name of Company is allowed - application allowed. Corporate Laws 2018 (3) TMI 1438 Prayer seeking re-instatement of shares in the name of the first respondent by directing the appellant to rectify the register of members - Held that:- There is absolutely no material to hold that the first respondent was put on notice, received the option form as per approved scheme and the cheque sent. A fraud was committed against the first respondent though not by the appellant, but by some one acted on its behalf, resulting in registration of case in Crime No.57 of 1999 under Sections 406, 420 and 120 of IPC. It is also an admitted fact that the members of the first respondent was fraudulently changed. Hence, as rightly found by the Company Law Board, such a negligence on the part of the appellant cannot enure to its benefit as against the first respondent. The change of address of the first respondent was expressly unauthorised and illegal. The first respondent has taken a consistent stand throughout. It is not, as if, she has made the claim only after seeking escalation of the price of the shares. As rightly submitted by the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the first respondent, the Scheme, as approved by the Court cannot have an application to the person, who was not being issued with even the option form as a fraud has been committed against her. Thus, the abovesaid decision approving the scheme cannot have an application to the case of the first respondent. The concession given by the learned counsel and accepted by the Court has been made applicable to those shareholders, who expressed their desire to obtain shares. Thus, the aforesaid proceedings, as rightly held by the Company Law Board, cannot bind the first respondent. This Court does not find any complicated questions of fact involved. As discussed earlier, there is no dispute on primary facts. Though the proceedings before the Company Law Board is summary in nature, as no complicated questions of fact involved warranting a detailed trial on examination of parties, this Court is unable to accept the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the appellant in this regard. Company appeal dismissed. 2018 (3) TMI 1437 Application for winding up - cheques dishonored - liability to pay the amount - Held that:- The financial accommodation/loan of Rs. 60 lakhs from the petitioner and as recorded in the letters dated July 17, 2013 and September 7, 2014 the respondent company was liable to repay the said amount to the petitioner together with the agreed rate of interest. In order to discharge its obligation, the company had issued two post dated cheques of Rs. 60 lakhs and Rs. 10,54,110/-, respectively both dated September 1, 2015 to the petitioner and when the petitioner presented the said cheques for encashment through its bank, the same were dishonoured on the ground of insufficient funds. Until receipt of the notice under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 from the petitioner, the company did not inform the petitioner not to deposit any of the said two post dated cheques. Even in the affidavit in opposition, the respondent company has not disclosed any document whatsoever to suggest any oral agreement between the parties for adjustment of all the amount receivable by the petitioner against acquisition of any property at Kona, in the district of Howrah. For all these reasons, as find that the defence sought to be made out by the company in this application against the claim of the petitioner, lacks bona fide and the same has no merit. The application for winding up of the company is admitted for a sum of Rs. 73,95,617/- as mentioned in the notice dated December 1, 2015, under Section 434 of the Act of 1956, issued by the petitioner. The company is directed to pay the said sum of Rs. 73,95,617/- to the petitioner within a period of three weeks from date. 2018 (3) TMI 1436 Oppression or mismanagement - illegal transfer of shareholding by Appellant no. 3 in favour of Appellant no. 2 - Held that:- The Respondent, by engaging in research devised products initially providing company to gain foothold in the market but that was expected of him as an employee of the status of Vice President who also held 5% shareholding. The contribution made by him for emergence of the company during its early days cannot be termed something for which he could expect a windfall. Finding recorded by learned NCLT to award Rs. 20 lakhs in favour of Respondent as a fair and reasonable amount in lieu of his professional qualification utilized during the initial days of establishment of Appellant no. 1 Company is unsustainable and cannot be supported. The claim set up by the Respondent for ‘Severance Pay’ of Rs. 26,75,000 in lieu of past services and as compensation for alleged unjustified termination is unsustainable and the same is to be rejected. We find ourselves in complete agreement with the learned NCLT in holding that nothing has been brought on record to establish that the transfer of shareholding by Appellant no. 3 in favour of Appellant no. 2 was not enforceable in law. No financial irregularity has been brought to our notice and there is no proof of oppression or mismanagement. There is nothing on record to arrive at a finding that the transfer of shareholding by Appellant no. 3 Company in favour of Appellant no. 2 Company was legally unenforceable. Contention raised on this count is accordingly repelled. There is no legal infirmity in the impugned order in so far as direction to Appellant no. 2 to accept the offer of transfer of 500 shares by the Respondent is concerned. As regards valuation, it has rightly been noticed by the learned NCLT that the valuation report dated 16th February 2015 has been drawn up merely for purpose of payment of stamp duty and not with the intention to determine the transfer price of shares. Be it seen that in terms of first valuation report dated 1st February, 2014 fair and reasonable price for transfer of shares was determined at Rs. 2064.74. Same was adopted by the concerned parties. In the face of same, the subsequent valuation report dated 16th February, 2015 has rightly been held as farce and undervalued to evade proper stamp duty. We accordingly find no infirmity in the finding recorded by learned NCLT that valuation report dated 1st February, 2014 at the rate of Rs. 2064.74 was to be taken into account for arriving at consideration amount of 500 shares to be transferred by the Respondent. This finding is accordingly upheld. This appeal is partly allowed. The impugned order is set aside to the extent of directing the Appellants to disburse Rs. 20 lakhs in favour of Respondent in lieu of his professional qualifications utilized during the initial days of establishment of Company. The impugned order is maintained in so far as direction to Appellant no. 2 to accept the offer of transfer of 500 shares by the Respondent at the rate of Rs. 2064.71 per share is concerned. Respondent is also held entitled to simple interest on the cost of such shares at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of impugned order. The appeal is disposed of in the aforesaid terms Insolvency & Bankruptcy 2018 (3) TMI 1455 Initiation of Corporate Insolvency Resolution process - default in making repayment of the loan facility availed from the Bank on 31.05.2011 - Held that:- Referring to material papers filed by the petitioner, it is no doubt fact that the corporate debtor availed loan facilities from the Petitioner and thereafter defaulted in making repayment to the Petitioner Bank, therefore the only consideration left to be decided by this Bench is as to whether this claim is barred by limitation or not. This Bench being satisfied that the Petitioner furnished all the material papers reflecting existence of debt and default within limitation, and the name of the Resolution Professional proposed to act as Interim Resolution Professional, this Bench hereby admits this application 2018 (3) TMI 1454 Bar of jurisdiction under Insolvency & Bankruptcy Code - action by District Disaster Management Authority sinking FDD - impact on the corporate debtors - Held that:- the subject matter involved in this case is not auction of the FDD but it is an action in progress in pursuance of the order given under the Disaster Management Act, 2005. When such an action being ordered, can anybody remain waiting until the Resolution Professional/Corporate Debtor take necessary steps to remove the sinking FDD from the Port. If for any reason, such salvage operations are put to stay in the light of the declaration of moratorium, what will happen if any grave occurrence taken place? Instead of applying equity, let us look into as to whether overriding effect and the moratorium directions given under Insolvency & Bankruptcy Code will have any bearing on the Disaster Management Act, 2005. In view of the legal position as on today existing, can it be construed that Insolvency & Bankruptcy Code, simply for the reason of later enactment, prevails over the Act of 2005? To our belief, it can’t be, because this Tribunal is barred to interfere with the jurisdiction exercised by the Collector of Goa. In the light of this background, we don’t even believe that we need to further clarify that operation of fields under both enactments is distinct and therefore overriding effect will not operate on the Act of 2005. Once jurisdiction itself is barred to this Adjudicating Authority under section 71 of the Act 2005, this Bench could not even look into the merits as to whether such order is right or wrong or into maintainability of the proceedings initiated or orders issued under the Act of 2005, let alone overriding effect of Insolvency & Bankruptcy Code on the Disaster Management Act, 2005. This Corporate Debtor has to go before Hon’ble High Court of Bombay-Goa by way of filing Writ Petition or by making its grievance in the Writ Petition already pending before the Hon’ble High Court of Bombay-Goa. Service Tax 2018 (3) TMI 1432 CENVAT credit - trading activity - non-maintenance of separate accounts - Held that: - the appellant reversed the cenvat credit along with interest even before issue of show cause notice. As such, the matter could have been closed in terms of Section 73(3) of the Finance Act, 1994. It would appear that only because the credit period was spread over beyond the normal limitation, the Revenue took action of imposing penalty. There is a strong case for the appellant to have a reasonable cause of non-reversal of such disputed credit in time - penalty set aside - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. 2018 (3) TMI 1431 Waiver of pre-deposit - Franchisee Services - CENVAT credit - Rule 6(3)(c) of the CCR 2004 - invoices are not in the name of appellant/registered premises of the appellant - Held that: - whether the activity undertaken by the appellant falls under the category of Franchisee Services or not has been dealt by this Tribunal in the case of Radico Khaitan Limited Vs. CST [2016 (6) TMI 366 - CESTAT NEW DELHI] wherein it was held that the said service does not fall under the category of Franchisee Service - the appellant are not liable to pay service tax under the category of Franchisee Service and it is a case of complete waiver of pre-deposit of demand of service tax. CENVAT credit - Held that: - the appellant has not taken excess credit of 20% of their tax liability - also, M/s. Seagram Manufacturing Pvt. Limited in whose name invoices have been issued has merged with the appellant, therefore on that ground, Cenvat credit cannot be denied - Cenvat credit cannot be denied on the premise that address at which the invoices have been issued, is not a registered premise. In fact, the invoices have been issued in the name of appellant and who has received the services. Appellant has made out a prima-facie case for complete waiver of pre-deposit of entire demands confirmed against the appellant - pre-deposit waived - appeal allowed. 2018 (3) TMI 1430 Refund of unutilized CENVAT credit - Place of Provision of services - appellants are engaged in providing of services to their client and the facilitating their clients for providing those services by third party. - intermediary services in terms of Rule 2(f) of Place of Provision of Rules, 2012 - reverse charge mechanism - Held that: - the appellant has provided the services to customers of their Client and having no direct nexus with the customers of their client has been provided by the appellant to their client and nowhere has facilitated or arranged for the services provided to their client by third party. Furthermore, the appellant has themselves provided the services to their client as the main service provider on principal to principal basis, therefore, the activity undertaken by the appellant do not qualify intermediary as defined in Rule 2(f) of Place of Provision of Services Rules, 2012. The appellant are not intermediaries in terms of Rule 2(f) of the Place of Provision of Service Rules, 2012. Therefore, the appellants are not liable to pay service tax being provider of service in India in terms of Rule 9 of the Place of Provision of Service Rules, 2012. Refund allowed - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. 2018 (3) TMI 1429 Reverse Charge Mechanism - GTA Service for the transportation services received by them - extended period of limitation - Held that: - the similar issue came up before this Tribunal in the case of Dinesh Chandra R. Agarwal Infracon Pvt. Ltd [2009 (10) TMI 395 - CESTAT, AHMEDABAD], where Tribunal hold that as whatever service tax would have been paid by the appellant the same was entitled to avail cenvat credit and the appellant was required to pay less service tax on their final services - the mala-fides against the appellant cannot be attributed, therefore, the extended period of limitation is not invokable - penalty set aside - appeal allowed. 2018 (3) TMI 1428 Scope of Service Tax Act - State of Jammu and Kashmir - GTA Service - reverse charge mechanism - Held that: - provisions of service within the state of Jammu & Kashmir is beyond scope of Chapter No. V of the Finance Act, 1994. Therefore, no provision related to Service Tax Law is presently applicable to services rendered in the state of Jammu & Kashmir - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. Central Excise 2018 (3) TMI 1427 Compliance with pre-deposit - Section 35F of the Central Excise Act, 1944 - Held that: - In the matter of Suvidha Signs Studios Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India [2016 (5) TMI 85 - DELHI HIGH COURT] the petitioner therein failed to comply with the statutory mandatory requirement of depositing the 7.5% of the demand of duty and penalty and therefore, the appeal of the petitioner therein was dismissed. Similar is the view taken in the matter of Pioneer Corporation v. Union of India [2016 (6) TMI 437 - DELHI HIGH COURT], where it was held that the jurisdiction of the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution to grant relief notwithstanding the amended Section 35F cannot possibly be taken away, the Court is of the view that the said power should be used in rare and deserving cases where a clear justification is made out for such interference. Petition dismissed. 2018 (3) TMI 1426 Non levy of penalty - section 80 of the Finance Act, 1994 - non-payment of tax for ignorance of law - Held that: - the appellant was under bonafide beleif regarding rate of service tax - the adjudicating authority was correct in coming to the conclusion that penalty, in these kind of matters wherein question of interpretation involved, does not arise and invoking the provisions of Section 80 is very correct and needs to be appreciated - appeal dismissed - decided against Revenue. 2018 (3) TMI 1425 Pre-deposit - amendment to section 35 of the Central Excise Act - Held that: - considering the difficulties shown, we extend the time for depositing the amount as directed by the CESTAT - We extend the time to deposit the amount as directed by the CESTAT under the impugned order by six weeks from today. In case, the appellants deposit the amount within six weeks from today the order dismissing the appeals shall stand set aside - appeal disposed off. 2018 (3) TMI 1424 Pre-deposit - Held that: - Considering that the debate with regard to validity of rule 8(3A) of the Central Excise Rules is not yet concluded and is sub-judice before the Apex Court and further considering the fact that the present appellants have deposited the defaulted amount in cash with interest after the impugned orders are passed, the impugned order is set aside - The CESTAT shall hear the appeals on their own merits filed by the present appellants without insisting for pre-deposit - appeal disposed off. 2018 (3) TMI 1423 Interest - relevant date for calculation of interest - contention of the appellant is that appellant would be liable to pay interest after the order is passed in Original by the authority pursuant to the order of remand and not from the date the order in Original passed before remand - Held that: - Only because in the order of remand, the Tribunal did not record the words “set aside the order of adjudicating authority”, that would not mean that while remitting the matter, the Original order was intact - the decision in the case of BLUE STAR LIMITED Versus UNION OF INDIA [2009 (10) TMI 257 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT], where it was held that Setting aside an order means there is no order and party relegated for fresh adjudication. Stage of adjudication cannot be said to be determination. An adjudication will culminate in an order and such order would be determination and/or ascertainment of duty, and no interest is payable - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. 2018 (3) TMI 1422 Condonation of delay in filing appeal - approach to wrong forum - Held that: - the Section 14 of Limitation Act, 1963 have role to play as the applicants have approached to the wrong forum for taking the remedy against impugned orders - relying on the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Pasupati Overseas Pvt. Ltd. [1996 (3) TMI 133 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA], we condone he delay in filing the appeals by allowing applications for condonation of delay - Petition allowed. 2018 (3) TMI 1420 VCES Scheme - time limitation - CENVAT credit - denial on the ground that such discharge certificate is not one of the specified documents for the purpose of availment of credit under rule 9 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 and as such credit cannot be allowed to them - Held that: - Having held that the said certificate was a proper document, the appellate authority should have allowed the credit instead of rejecting the part on the ground of time bar. If the assessee’s tax credit is on the basis of challan itself, the concurrence of the Revenue is not involved and it can be alleged that he deposited the tax and took the credit on his own without waiting for the final order of the acceptance by the proper authority. As such, it was necessary, under the scheme, to receive the discharge certificate before availing the credit, in which case, even limitation would not get involved. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. 2018 (3) TMI 1419 CENVAT credit - delay of one day in filing the statement - the sole ground to deny self credit to the appellants by the Commissioner (Appeals) is that condition of para 2C(d) of the N/N. 56/2002-CE is required to be complied strictly - Held that: - a similar issue came up before this Tribunal recently in the case of Saraswati Agro Chemicals India Ltd. [2018 (3) TMI 263 - CESTAT CHANDIGARH], wherein this Tribunal examined the Notification No.01/2010-CE dt. 06.02.2010 and related conditions in para 5(d), 5(e) and 5(f) and held that condition 5(d) of the Notification No.01/2010-CE dt. 06.02.2010 is procedural in nature and for complying with the said condition with a delay cannot be fatal to the appellants. Condition 2C(d) is procedural in nature and for compliance with the said notification, delay of one day cannot be fatal to the appellant and the self credit taken by the appellants cannot be denied. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. 2018 (3) TMI 1418 Dutiability - scrap generated during the course of fabrication of capital goods - Revenue is of the view that waste and scrap is an excisable item in terms of Note 8A of Section 15 of Central Excise Tariff Act, therefore, they are required to pay duty on the waste and scrap - Held that: - The waste has been generated on these items due to said activity - As the Hon'ble Apex Court held in the case of Grassim Industries ltd. [2008 (7) TMI 79 - HIGH COURT RAJASTHAN] that the said activity does not amount to manufacture. In that circumstances, in terms of Note 8A of Section 15 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, the appellant are not liable to pay duty - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. 2018 (3) TMI 1417 Scope of SCN - Refund claim - rejection on the ground of limitation u/s 11B of the CEA 1944, which was not a ground in the SCN - Held that: - time limitation was not a ground raised in the SCN - There is no discussion in the orders of both the lower authorities on the submission of the appellant on the issue of unjust enrichment and the documents submitted by the appellant to substantiate their claim. The matter requires re-examination by the adjudicating authority in terms of SCN dt.25.6.2015 - appeal allowed by way of remand. CST, VAT & Sales Tax 2018 (3) TMI 1416 Whether in absence of any assessment order passed in the original proceeding under Section 21(7) of the VAT Act, the assessing officer has power and jurisdiction to reassess the said deemed reassessment by resorting to reassessment proceeding under Section 22(1) of the VAT Act and further the consequential question would be, whether in that case, the assessing officer is justified in levying penalty under Section 22(2) of the VAT Act? Held that: - “order of assessment” employed in Section 22(1) of the VAT Act clearly denotes that there must be formal adjudication by the assessing officer after taking into account the return and statutory compliances and the documents furnished by the petitioner - In order to attract Section 22(1) of the VAT Act, there must be order of assessment made by the assessing officer in contradistinction to Section 21(2) which is a deemed assessment and which in case of the petitioner, it has been done is a legal fiction. The legislature is quite competent to create a legal fiction, in other words, to enact a deeming provision for the purpose of assuming existence of a fact which does not really exist. In sum and substance, in order to invoke jurisdiction under Section 22(1) of the VAT Act or to initiate proceedings for reassessment there must be an order of assessment duly passed by the assessing officer and it must be in existence as a condition precedent to invoke Section 22(1) and the limitation prescribed is five calendar years from the date of commencement of such proceedings, whereas the deemed assessment order under Section 21(2) is only reassessable under Section 21(3) of the VAT Act within one calendar year from such year. In case there is no order of assessment passed under Section 21(7) of the VAT Act, it cannot be subject to reassessment proceeding under Section 22(1) of the VAT Act. Penalty - whether the penalty imposed invoking Section 22(2) of the VAT Act is sustainable? - Held that: - it has already been held that there is no order of assessment as the assessing officer did not pass any assessment order and thus, there is failure on the part of the assessing officer to pass the original assessment order. For the reason that the order of reassessment is to be held without jurisdiction and without authority of law, therefore, the order imposing penalty passed upon reassessment cannot stand and accordingly, it deserves to be quashed. Order of assessment quashed - petition allowed. 2018 (3) TMI 1415 Validity of assessment order - Held that: - Having admitted the mistake, the respondent could not have proceeded further, without making proper proposal, he proposed to proceed with the assessment on totally different lines. This mistake committed by the respondent goes to the root of the mater, affecting the very orders of assessment. This is sufficient to hold that the impugned orders are bad in law, as they have exceeded the proposal in the Revision Notices, dated 14.11.2016, and without due application of mind - Petition allowed. 2018 (3) TMI 1414 Validity of assessment order - scope of SCN - input tax credit - Held that: - the assessment order was passed based on facts, of which the petitioner was not informed in the show-cause notice issued to them earlier - The first respondent shall issue a notice afresh in Form VAT 305-A; give the petitioner an opportunity of being heard, and an opportunity of oral hearing; and, thereafter, pass a fresh assessment order in accordance with law at the earliest - petition disposed off. 2018 (3) TMI 1413 Rejection of appeal for non-compliance - default pointed out by the Additional Commissioner in the appeal was that the entire amount assessed was not deposited and the appeal also has been filed at a belated stage after about 5 months delay - Held that: - this Court is of the opinion that ends of justice would meet if the Petitioner is granted one more opportunity to appear before the Additional Commissioner and satisfy the Additional Commissioner in appeal which is pending before the Additional Commissioner pertaining to Annexure P-1, subject to the Petitioner being penalized by paying a cost of Rs. 10,000/- to be deposited in the office of the Commercial Tax Department - petition disposed off. 2018 (3) TMI 1412 Concessional rate of tax - supplies effected to the Unit run canteens - It is the stand of the petitioners in the writ petition that, as per the statutory provisions, the benefit of concessional rate of tax is applicable, not only in respect of supplies effected to the Canteens Stores Department, but also in respect of supplies effected to the Unit run canteens of the Military, Navy and Air Force - Held that: - taking note of the distinction between a sale effected directly to the Canteen Stores Department and sales effected directly to Unit-run canteens of the Military, Navy, Air force etc., the State Government decided to depart from the earlier practice of granting concessional rate of tax even in respect of supplies effected to Unit-run canteens and confined the benefit of concessional rate of tax only to supplies effected to the Canteen Stores Department. The amendment, however, was to take effect only from the assessment year 2014-15, and for the prior period, it was felt not necessary to interfere with the benefit of concessional rate of tax, that was already extended to unit run canteens. The assessing Authority has not taken note of this amendment, which came into effect only from the assessment year 2014-15, and appears to have applied the rationale of the amended provision to even the earlier assessment years up to, but not inclusive of the assessment year 2014-15 - the assessment orders impugned in all these writ petitions, inasmuch as they pertain to assessment years 2011-12, 2012-13 and 2013-14, must necessarily be quashed. As regards 17209/2017, Ext.P3 assessment order, that is impugned in the said writ petition, pertains to the assessment year 2014-15, and the interpretation to be placed on the provisions of the 5th proviso to Section 6(1), is as indicated in this judgment. It is made clear that, in the said case, the petitioner will not be entitled to the benefit of the concessional rate of tax in respect of supplies effected to Unit-run canteens. Petition disposed off. Indian Laws 2018 (3) TMI 1435 Validity of Arbitral Award - time limitation - Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 - Whether Anilkumar Patel represented his family in the arbitration proceedings and whether respondents are right in contending that receipt of copy of award by Anilkumar Patel was for himself and on behalf of his family members? Held that: - Section 34(3) provides that an application for setting aside an award shall not be entertained by the court if it is made after three months have elapsed from the date on which the applicant had received the arbitral award. The proviso to Section 34 further provides that if the court is satisfied that the applicant was prevented by sufficient cause from making the application within the prescribed time, it may entertain the application within a further period of thirty days 'but not thereafter' - Proviso to Section 34 gives discretion to the court to condone the delay for a sufficient cause, but that discretion cannot be extended beyond the period of thirty days, which is made exclusively clear by use of the words 'but not thereafter'. Service of arbitral award on Anilkumar Patel amounts to service on the other appellant Nos.1(a) to 1(d) and respondent No.10 and they cannot plead non-compliance of Section 31(5) of the Act. Anilkumar Patel has gone to the extent of even disputing his signature in the award dated 07.07.1996 by drafting choreographed petition. Having accepted the award through Anilkumar Patel, being the head of the family, appellant Nos. 1(a) to 1(d) and respondent No.10 cannot turn round and contend that they had not received the copy of the award. The application filed under Section 34 of the Act by Anilkumar Patel and appellant Nos. 1(a) to 1(d) and respondent No.10 was barred by limitation - appeal dismissed. 2018 (3) TMI 1434 Whether prior sanction for prosecution qua allegation of corruption in respect of a public servants is required before setting in motion even the investigative process under Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973? Held that: - Merely because the appellant has roped in respondent No.1 in the complaint is not sufficient ground to allow his name to be included as such. The complaint is categorical, the role of Secretary, PHED and the Principal Secretary has been questioned. That is the mindset with which the complainant knocked the doors of the criminal courts - There was no allegation in respect of any role played by the Secretary/Principal Secretary to the Chief Minister. It cannot be said to be a mere mis-description of name, which can be corrected. It cannot be the stand of the appellant that willy-nilly somehow, respondent No.1 must remain arrayed as an accused in those proceedings, even though the proceedings before the Magistrate are at the stage of only whether there should be a direction for investigation or not. It is not that every officer in the Government has to be arrayed in respect of any role performed or not. The mere presence in one meeting of respondent No.1 and that too when he was not a signatory and really had no role to play in that capacity, as apparent from the minutes, cannot be now used to justify his name being included as an accused. This is clearly an afterthought. It is not for the appellant to question as to which officer should or should not be present. Respondent No.1 needs to be struck off from the array of parties both in the present proceedings and consequently in the complaint - if a situation arises where investigation is directed u/s 156(3) of the Cr.P.C. and some material comes to light to array respondent No.1 as an accused, our order would not come in the way. The matter is referred to a larger Bench - application allowed. 2018 (3) TMI 1433 Maintainability of petition - Jurisdiction of Court - Compliance with Sec 2(2) of Cost and Works Accountants Act 1959 as amended - petition prayed that the acronym ICOAI be used instead of acronym ICAI which belongs to the third respondent - The first respondent changed their website from ICWAI to ICAI and started representing themselves as ICAI in all its communication with print and electronic media, blatantly misrepresenting to the stake holders by using the acronym ICAI. Whether this Court by exercising the jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India need to go into the dispute with regard to the usage of acronym "ICAI" by both the first and third respondents, especially, when it is an admitted fact that the third respondent themselves have admitted in their counter affidavit that the Trade Mark for the acronym "ICAI" was registered under the Trade Marks Act, 1999 and the Certificate of Registration of Trade Mark dated 11.09.2016, was issued to them to that effect? Held that: - the above question is to be answered in negative and it is held that the third respondent, who sails with the petitioner, has to seek their remedy before appropriate forum by filing appropriate proceedings arising out of infringement of Registered Trademarks or passing off action, if any, as the writ jurisdiction is not the appropriate one, more particularly when the petitioner is not an aggrieved person even. There can be no difficulty in holding that till the name of the first respondent is changed as proposed by them, as stated supra, if they continue to use the acronym "ICAI" and if the third respondent is aggrieved against such usage in view of the registration of such trademark by the third respondent in their favour as discussed supra, certainly, it is for the third respondent to initiate appropriate legal action before the appropriate forum by filing appropriate application under the Trademarks Act - certainly the present writ petition cannot be maintained that too, at the instance of the petitioner, who is only a member of the third respondent more particularly, when the third respondent has not chosen to challenge such alleged infringement before the competent Court of law so far. Needless to state that the Trademark right is a proprietary right and therefore only such owner of the Trademark, if aggrieved against any infringement of such trademark, has locus standi and consequently a cause of action to initiate appropriate proceedings before the appropriate forum against such infringement and to seek the appropriate relief thereunder. Such proprietary right of trademark is a right in personam and not a right in rem. Therefore, the petitioner, though a member of the third respondent, cannot be called as an aggrieved person, even to initiate the proceedings before such appropriate forum against the alleged infringement. The writ petition fails and the same is dismissed only on the ground of maintainability.
← Older Newer →

Quick Updates:

What's New:
Latest Case Laws

What's New:
Latest Notifications

What's New:
Latest Circulars

F: Soil Purchase for Resale: Can Dispatch Challans Replace Proper Invoice...

F: Company Must Hold EGM to Adopt Financial Statements After AGM Failure,...

F: Jurisdiction Question: Can a Superintendent Issue GST Demand Summary W...

F: GST Audits Have No Time Limitation Under Section 65, Unlike Show Cause...

F: Pre-Deposit Refund After Favorable GST Appeal: System Error Workaround...

F: Taxpayer's Amnesty Scheme Payment at Risk Due to Missing DRC-03A Form ...

A: Mandatory GSTR-1 Filing: Reporting Outward Supplies Under GST With 15 ...

A: Filing OPC Annual Returns: 180-Day Deadline, Required Forms, and Commo...

A: Deodorant Sprays vs. Traditional Attars: Why Natural Indian Perfumes O...

A: Low-Quality Chinese Imports Harm Indian Industries: Solutions Include ...

A: Comprehensive Export Risk Management: Strategies for Political, Econom...

A: India's Pharmaceutical Industry Seeks to Reduce Dependence on Chinese ...

A: Proposed U.S. Tariffs on Indian Pharmaceuticals Could Raise Drug Price...

A: Saharanpur Wooden Craftsmanship: Traditional Artistry Supporting Artis...

A: Preserving Cultural Heritage: How Mithila Paintings Support Women Arti...

A: Mughal-Inspired Mirzapur Rugs: Preserving Traditional Craftsmanship Wh...

H: GST Orders Uploaded Without Proper Service Violate Natural Justice, Co...

H: GST Time Extension During COVID-19: Court Defers Ruling on Section 168...

H: Bail denied for mastermind accused of Rs. 53.03 Crore GST fraud throug...

H: Lufthansa Wins Challenge Against Withholding Tax Rate Change Under Ind...

H: Section 54F Deduction Denied: Timing of House Purchase and Constructio...

H: Tax Relief: Exchange of Old Flat for New in Redevelopment Not Taxable ...

H: Interest on Rupee-Denominated CCDs Must Be Benchmarked Against Domesti...

H: Assessee in Power Business Denied Enhanced 35% Depreciation Under Sect...

H: Taxpayer's Appeal Succeeds as Cash from Selling Deceased Wife's Jewelr...

H: Quantitative Restrictions on LAM Coke Imports Valid Under Section 9A o...

H: Courier Company Penalized for CIER Violations Despite KYC Compliance C...

H: Penalty Under Section 112(b) of Customs Act Reduced for Imported Motor...

H: Customs Act Section 149: Shipping Bill Amendments Require Contemporane...

H: Customs Duty Payment Under DGFT Amnesty Scheme Shields Importers From ...

↑Top

Newsletter: Where Service Meets Reader Approval.

TMI Tax Updates - e-Newsletter March 30, 2018

TMI SMS

Articles

1. APPLICABILITY OF SECTION 5 OF LIMITATION ACT IN CONDONING THE DELAY IN FILING APPEAL BEFORE THE NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL

2. Confusions in GST Law: Part 2

News

1. NITI Aayog releases Baseline Ranking of Aspirational Districts

2. 7th Edition of the Status Paper on Government Debt

3. Cabinet approves continuation of the Credit Guarantee Fund for Education Loans Scheme and continuation and modification of Central Sector Interest Subsidy Scheme

4. Cabinet approves Export of all edible oils in bulk (except mustard oil)

5. Cabinet approves enhancing the coverage of Pradhan Mantri Rojgar Protsahan Yojana

6. Cabinet approves continuation of Nutrient Based Subsidy and City Compost Scheme till 2019-20

7. Cabinet approves fixation of Nutrient Based Subsidy rates for Phosphatic and Potassic (P&K) fertilizers for the year 2018-19

8. IBBI Notifies Amendments to The Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (Insolvency Professionals) Regulations, 2016

Notifications

1. 59/2015-2020 - dated 28-3-2018 - FTP

2. 58/2015-2020 - dated 28-3-2018 - FTP

3. 57/2015-2020 - dated 28-3-2018 - FTP

4. 20/2018 - dated 28-3-2018 - CGST

5. 19/2018 - dated 28-3-2018 - CGST

6. 18/2018 - dated 28-3-2018 - CGST

7. 17/2018 - dated 28-3-2018 - CGST

8. EXN-F(10)-14/2018-16/2018-State Tax - dated 27-3-2018 - Himachal Pradesh SGST

9. EXN-F(10)-14/2018-15/2018-State Tax - dated 27-3-2018 - Himachal Pradesh SGST

10. EXN-F(10)-14/2018-14/2018-State Tax - dated 27-3-2018 - Himachal Pradesh SGST

11. EXN-F(10)-14/2018-10/2018-State Tax (Rate) - dated 23-3-2018 - Himachal Pradesh SGST

12. EXN-F(10)-14/2018-13/2018-State Tax - dated 22-3-2018 - Himachal Pradesh SGST

13. EXN-F(10)-14/2018-12/2018-State Tax - dated 22-3-2018 - Himachal Pradesh SGST

14. ACCT/TP/GST/Noti/500-516-40/2018 - dated 26-3-2018 - Jammu & Kashmir SGST

15. SRO 122 - dated 5-3-2018 - Jammu & Kashmir SGST

16. SRO GST 31-(Rate) - dated 29-1-2018 - Jammu & Kashmir SGST

17. SRO GST 30-(Rate) - dated 29-1-2018 - Jammu & Kashmir SGST

18. 10/2018 - dated 23-3-2018 - Karnataka SGST

19. 08/2018 - dated 23-3-2018 - Karnataka SGST

20. 01-C/2018 - dated 23-3-2018 - Karnataka SGST

21. 04-N/2017 - dated 15-3-2018 - Karnataka SGST

22. 07/2018 - dated 7-3-2018 - Karnataka SGST

23. No. IBBI/2017-18/GN/REG030 - dated 27-3-2018 - IBC

24. No. IBBI/2017-18/GN/REG028 - dated 27-3-2018 - IBC

25. IBBI/2017-18/GN/REG027 - dated 27-3-2018 - IBC

26. IBBI/2017-18/GN/REG 029 - dated 27-3-2018 - IBC

Circulars / Instructions / Orders

1. Order No. 1 /2018 - dated 28-3-2018

2. 69/2015-2020 - dated 28-3-2018

3. 70/2015-2020 - dated 28-3-2018

4. Instruction No. 5/2018 - dated 28-3-2018

5. 51/2018 - dated 28-3-2018

6. 49/2018 - dated 26-3-2018

7. 50/2018 - dated 26-3-2018

8. 47/2018 - dated 23-3-2018

9. 48 /2018 - dated 23-3-2018

Highlights / Catch Notes

GST

Quarterly GSTR-1 Submission Deadlines Set for Small Taxpayers with Turnover Up to Rs. 1.5 Crore to Ease Compliance.

GSTR-1 Filing Deadline Extended for Taxpayers with Turnover Over Rs. 1.5 Crores.

Deadline Extended for Filing FORM GSTR-6 Under GST: Ensure Compliance with New Date.

Deadline Extended for Agencies to File Refund Applications u/s 55 of GST Notification.

Court Declines to Direct Respondents on Including Petrol and Diesel Under GST as Requested by Petitioner.

Income Tax

Section 68 Addition Overturned: No Business Income, No Books of Account; Passbook Not Recognized as Book of Account.

Assessing Officers must justify deviations from previous year's approach; res judicata doesn't apply, but consistency does.

Customs

Tribunal Questions Import Ban on Goods Misdeclared for Industrial Use but Used as Animal Feed; FSSAI Certificate Issues Unresolved.

EOU's Debonding Issues: No Duty Evasion Intent Found, Penalties and Confiscation Demands Deemed Unwarranted.

Appellant Faces Duty Demand After Rejected Mobile and TV Components Cleared as Scrap at Uttarakhand Factory.

DGFT

New Import Regulations for Second-Hand Goods: Guidelines for Repair, Refurbishing, and Reconditioning Ensuring Safety and Compliance.

India Updates Import Policy for Seal Skin Under ITC (HS) 2017 Chapters 41, 42, and 43.

Indian Laws

Cabinet Approves Expansion of Pradhan Mantri Rojgar Protsahan Yojana to Boost Job Creation and Support Economic Growth.

IBBI amends Insolvency Professionals Regulations, 2016 to boost compliance and efficiency in insolvency proceedings.

Supreme Court Rules on Arbitral Award Validity: Family Representative's Acceptance Binds All Members to Time Limits.

High Court Rules ICAI Member Not Aggrieved in Case Against Cost Accountants for 'ICAI' Acronym Use.

IBC

Insolvency Code Bars Tribunal from Intervening in District Disaster Management Authority Actions on FDD Sinking in Goa.

Service Tax

Appellants Not Intermediaries u/r 2(f), Exempt from Service Tax as Providers in India Per Rule 9, 2012 Rules.

Service Tax Act exempts services in Jammu & Kashmir, including GTA services under reverse charge mechanism. No service tax obligations apply.

Central Excise

TMI Tax Updates - e-Newsletter
March 30, 2018