Read more at: https://taxguru.in/income-tax/ex-parte-order-unjustified-revenue-failed-carry-primary-duty-post-non-service-notice.htmlCopyright © Taxguru.in Clipped from: https://taxguru.in/income-tax/ex-parte-order-unjustified-revenue-failed-carry-primary-duty-post-non-service-notice.html Stanton Capital (India) P Ltd. Vs ITO (ITAT Ahmedabad) ITAT Ahmedabad held that post non-service of notice, revenue
Category: Service Tax
👍👍👍👍👍No penalty if no intention to evade service tax & for tax paid before issue of notice
Read more at: https://taxguru.in/service-tax/penalty-intention-evade-service-tax-tax-paid-issue-notice.htmlCopyright © Taxguru.in Clipped from: https://taxguru.in/service-tax/penalty-intention-evade-service-tax-tax-paid-issue-notice.html Assam Company India Limited Vs Commissioner of Service Tax (CESTAT Kolkata) Revenue has not brought any evidence to
👍👍👍👍👍Non receipt of Notices: HC quashes Order of Maharashtra Sales Tax Tribunal
Clipped from: https://taxguru.in/goods-and-service-tax/non-receipt-notices-hc-quashes-order-maharashtra-sales-tax-tribunal.html Kirloskar Oil Engines Ltd. Vs State of Maharashtra and Ors. (Bombay High Court) Heard learned Counsel for the parties. 2. By this Petition,
👍👍👍👍👍Demand of extended period not sustainable If no suppression of facts
Clipped from: https://taxguru.in/excise-duty/demand-extended-period-sustainable-suppression-facts.html C.C.E.-Ahmedabad Vs Quippo Energy Pvt Limited (CESTAT Ahmedabad) CESTAT held that since there is no suppression of fact, demand of extended period is
👍👍👍👍👍👍👍Demand of extended period not sustainable If no suppression of facts
Clipped from: https://taxguru.in/excise-duty/demand-extended-period-sustainable-suppression-facts.html C.C.E.-Ahmedabad Vs Quippo Energy Pvt Limited (CESTAT Ahmedabad) CESTAT held that since there is no suppression of fact, demand of extended period is
👍👍👍👍👍CESTAT sets aside Revenue’s Demand for Extended Period in Absence of Malafide Act for Service Tax Evasion
Read More: https://www.taxscan.in/cestat-sets-aside-revenues-demand-for-extended-period-in-absence-of-malafide-act-for-service-tax-evasion/273686/ lipped from: https://www.taxscan.in/cestat-sets-aside-revenues-demand-for-extended-period-in-absence-of-malafide-act-for-service-tax-evasion/273686/ The Ahmedabad Bench of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), sets aside the Revenue’s Demand for Extended Period in the absence of
👍Failure to Establish Sufficient Cause for not Filling Appeals
Clipped from: https://www.taxscan.in/failure-to-establish-sufficient-cause-for-not-filling-appeals-within-the-prescribed-period-of-limitation-itat-upholds-dismissal-of-appeals/273072/ Failure to Establish Sufficient Cause for not Filling Appeals within the Prescribed Period of Limitation: ITAT upholds Dismissal of Appeals [Read Order] The
👍AO shall Conduct Independent Investigation without relying on Third Party Statements and Facts: ITAT upholds Deletion of Additions u/s 68
Clipped from: https://www.taxscan.in/ao-shall-conduct-independent-investigation-without-relying-on-third-party-statements-and-facts-itat-upholds-deletion-of-additions-u-s-68/273139/ AO shall Conduct Independent Investigation without relying on Third Party Statements and Facts: ITAT upholds Deletion of Additions u/s 68 [Read Order] The
👍👍👍👍👍Extended period of limitation not invocable as non-payment of tax was due to bonafide belief
Clipped from: https://taxguru.in/service-tax/extended-period-limitation-invocable-non-payment-tax-due-bonafide-belief.html Namakkal Agricultural Producers Co-Operative Marketing Society Vs Commissioner of Central Excise (CESTAT Chennai) CESTAT Chennai held that non-payment of service tax under GTA
👍👍👍👍👍👍👍Delay condone period due to covid 👍plus👌 Dept Appeal Below Tax Effect of Rs. 50 Lakhs: ITAT dismisses Appeal as per CBDT Circular
Read More: https://www.taxscan.in/dept-appeal-below-tax-effect-of-rs-50-lakhs-itat-dismisses-appeal-as-per-cbdt-circular/272444/ Clipped from: https://www.taxscan.in/dept-appeal-below-tax-effect-of-rs-50-lakhs-itat-dismisses-appeal-as-per-cbdt-circular/272444/?utm_source=izooto&utm_medium=push_notifications&utm_campaign=Dept%20Appeal%20Below%20Tax%20Effect%20of%20Rs.%2050%20Lakhs:%20ITAT%20dismisses%20Appeal%20as%20per%20CBDT%20Circular The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Kolkata Bench, has recently, in an appeal filed before it, on finding the same to be a dept
👍Adjudicating Authority cannot go beyond the Scope of SCN: CESTAT
Clipped from: https://taxguru.in/custom-duty/adjudicating-authority-scope-scn-cestat.html Suraj Electronics P. Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Customs (Imports) (CESTAT Chennai) It is noticed by Commissioner (Appeals) that stay was granted waiving the
👍👍👍Central Excise Act One year limitation not applies to Service Tax paid under Protest
Clipped from: https://taxguru.in/service-tax/central-excise-act-one-year-limitation-applies-service-tax-paid-protest.html Erweka India Vs Commissioner of Central Excise & ST (CESTAT Ahmedabad) The issue involved in the present case is whether the appellants refund
👍👍👍👍👍Section 75(4) U.P. GST Act is Mandatory, Even if no Demand in Writing for Hearing is made out: Allahabad HC Quashes Order
Clipped from: https://www.taxscan.in/section-754-u-p-gst-act-is-mandatory-even-if-no-demand-in-writing-for-hearing-is-made-out-allahabad-hc-quashes-order/269641/ By Aparna. M – On April 17, 2023 1:00 pm – 2 mins read In a significant case, the Allahabad High Court held that section 75(4) of
👍👍👍👍👍Delhi HC Set Aside Section 148A(d) Order Passed without Considering Reply of Assessee: Directs de novo exercise
Clipped from: https://www.taxscan.in/delhi-hc-set-aside-section-148ad-order-passed-without-considering-reply-of-assessee-directs-de-novo-exercise/269531/ The Delhi Bench of High Court has set aside the order passed under Section 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act 1961 as this
👍👍👍Madras HC sets aside Assessment Order passed violative of the Natural Justice Principle
Clipped from: https://www.taxscan.in/gst-madras-hc-sets-aside-assessment-order-passed-violative-of-the-natural-justice-principle/269735/ The Madras High Court set aside the assessment order passed under the Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 which was violative of the
Section 75(4) U.P. GST Act is Mandatory, Even if no Demand in Writing for Hearing is made out: Allahabad HC Quashes Order
Read More: https://www.taxscan.in/section-754-u-p-gst-act-is-mandatory-even-if-no-demand-in-writing-for-hearing-is-made-out-allahabad-hc-quashes-order/269641/ Clipped from: https://www.taxscan.in/section-754-u-p-gst-act-is-mandatory-even-if-no-demand-in-writing-for-hearing-is-made-out-allahabad-hc-quashes-order/269641/?utm_source=izooto&utm_medium=push_notifications&utm_campaign=Section%2075(4)%20U.P.%20GST%20Act%20is%20Mandatory,%20Even%20if%20no%20Demand%20in%20Writing%20for%20Hearing%20is%20made%20out:%20Allahabad%20HC%20Quashes%20Order By Aparna. M – On April 17, 2023 1:00 pm – 2 mins read In a significant case, the Allahabad High Court held that section
👍👍👍👍👍Without Suppression of Facts or Fraud Extended Period of Limitation cannot be invoked
Clipped from: https://taxguru.in/excise-duty/suppression-facts-fraud-extended-period-limitation-invoked.html Mangalore Refinery And Petrochemicals Ltd. Vs Commissioner Of Central Excise & Central Tax (CESTAT Bangalore) CESTAT find force in the submissions made by
👍👍👍👍👍HC quashes service tax notices issued after lapse of 10 years
Clipped from: https://taxguru.in/service-tax/hc-quashes-service-tax-notices-issued-lapse-10-years.html Satish Ch. Das & Co. Vs Commissioner of Central Excise & Customs (Orissa High Court) 1. Both the petitions have been filed by
👍Extended period not involcable in absence of suppression, misrepresentation or fraud
Clipped from: https://taxguru.in/excise-duty/extended-period-involcable-absence-suppression-misrepresentation-fraud.html Principal Commissioner of CGST & Central Excise Vs Securities and Exchange Board of India (Bombay High Court) Bombay High Court held that extended
👍👍👍SCN cannot be issued on the basis of mere Suspicion
Clipped from: https://taxguru.in/custom-duty/scn-issued-basis-suspicion.html Shree Rishabhdev Marble and Minerals Private Limited Vs Commissioner of Customs (Preventive) (CESTAT Delhi) CESTAT find that the present proceedings before this Court
aniltikotekar4sme.com 