Stay updated
The Hon’ble High Court of Bombay in the case of Tokheim India (P.) Ltd. wherein the Assessee had challenged the adjudication on the ground that GST was not leviable on the assignment of leasehold rights and buildings to a third party.
The Bombay High Court has quashed a local court order issuing a non-bailable warrant against actor Arjun Rampal in a 2019 tax evasion case, terming the order ‘mechanical and cryptic’.
The Nagpur bench of the Bombay high court has held that Goods and Services Tax (GST) is not applicable to the transfer of development rights (TDR) or floor space index (FSI) as part of a development agreement.
The Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of FSM Education Pvt Ltd held that no adjudication orders were to be passed where a pre-consultation notice is issued to an Assessee and Assessee had responded to same. Nevertheless, a subsequent SCN was issued to Assessee, while department could adjudicate said SCN.
The Bombay High Court will decide whether donuts and cakes should be subject to a 5% or 18% tax under the Goods and Services Tax (GST). The case comes after a plea by Himesh Foods Pvt Ltd, the parent company of Mad Over Donuts (MOD), challenging a show-cause notice issued by the Directorate General of GST Intelligence (DGGI).
The Hon’ble Bombay High Court, in the case of Raiden Infotech India (P.) Ltd. restored the Refund Application where the deficiency memo in Form GST RFD-03 was not issued to the Assessee, and the order rejecting the refund application was to be set aside. However, since the Assessee failed to avail the opportunity granted to raise contentions in response to the SCN, the Assessee had to pay the cost.
In Skoda Auto Volkswagen India’s petition challenging a tax demand of USD 1.4 billion by Indian Customs authorities, the Bombay High Court today asked the Customs Authority to file an affidavit explaining why the September 2024 show-cause notice issued to the company is not barred by limitation.
The Hon’ble Bombay High Court in SheshnathAdyaprasad Singh, interim order was granted where documents including original purchase invoices submitted by the Assessee in response to the Show Cause Notice was lost by department while Assessee required those documents to substantiate its claim and though in affidavit Commissioner accepted loss of documents, a contrary letter was issued to Assessee stating that department had not received any document, department should show cause as to why disciplinary action should not be taken against concerned officers.
The Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Panacea Biotec Limited Vs Union of India & Ors set aside the SCN issued and order passed relating to levy of GST on the transaction relating to assignment of leasehold rights by a lessee to third party for on account of non-consideration of reply at the time of passing of order.
The Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Bramhanand Kanojia disposed the writ petition where pursuant to summons, a statement was recorded on wherein the Assessee admitted his liability and agreed to pay outstanding liability, along with interest, duty demand was quantified much before June 30, 2019. Hence, Assessee could not be disqualified under Section 125(11)(e) of Sabka Vishwas Scheme, 2019 and application for settlement of dispute under the SVLDR Scheme could not be rejected.