Click here to download the pdf versions of the Digest of case laws Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017
S.79:Recovery of tax – Order passed relying on material which was supplied to violates principle of natural justice – Matter remanded back for fresh adjudication after furnishing material relied upon and after giving an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner .[ Art, 226 ]
Lakshmi Sowjanya Enterprises v. ACIT( 2022) (64) G.S.T.L. 158( AP)(HC)Central Goods and Service Tax Act , 2007 ( CGST)
S. 29: Cancellation or suspension of registration- Show cause notice – Adjudication order vague – Cancellation of Registration was not sustainable – Stricture against Department – Adjudication order was quashed – Court observed that it was beyond under standing of Court as to why its officers were not ready to understand and improve .[ Art , 226 ]
Rafik Alibhai Makvana v . State of Gujarat (2022) (59) G.S.T.L 3 (Guj)(HC)Harassment by Department – Unnecessary SLP – Respondent suffering from Cancer – Cost of Rs 1,00,000 was imposed on the Officer to be recovered from his salary .
ADDE v. Kamal Ahsan & Anr www.itatonline .org (SC)S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Claim of set off of non speculative business loss against the profit of speculated business-Revision order is quashed. [passed by the PCIT u/s. 263 of the Act is quashed. [S. 28 (i), 72, 73]
Puli Ashok Reddy v. PCIT (2022) 64 CCH 372 / 216 TTJ 977 / 212 DTR 249 (Hyd.)(Trib.)S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-When valid and lawful agreement is entered by the parties prior to 1 April 2014 but the property was registered after said date, provisions of the amended section 56(2)(vii)(b) would be inoperative and therefore an assessment order passed after due consideration of all facts but without invoking the provisions of the amended section 56(2)(vii)(b) cannot be said to be erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the revenue.
Naina Saraf v. PCIT (2022) 216 TTJ 1 (UO) (Jaipur)(Trib.)S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Bogus accommodation entries-Revision on the basis of roving enquiries-CBDT circular on no set-off of loss against deemed income u/s 115BBE applicable w.e.f. 1st April 2017-Invocation of section 263 jurisdiction by the Ld. CIT is invalid-Income assessed remains same even pursuant to revision-Revision is not valid. [S. 56, 68, 115BBE, 143(3)]
Kamal Vyas v. PCIT (2022) 216 TTJ 7 / 211 DTR 25 (Mum.)(Trib.)S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to Revenue-AO failure to verify the genuineness of the lenders-Complete details not submitted by the assessee-Revision justified. [S. 133(6), 143(3), 147, 148]
Ajanta Infrastructure Ltd. v. CIT (2022) 216 TTJ 466/ 211 DTR 201 (Pune)(Trib.)S. 253 : Appellate Tribunal-Monetary limits-Circular specifying monetary limits for the department is retrospective in nature-the circular applies to already pending as well as new appeals. [S. 253(4)]
ACIT v. Northern Motors Pvt. Ltd. (2022) 216 TTJ 43 (UO) (Raipur)(Trib.)S. 251 : Appeal-Commissioner (Appeals)-Powers-New issue which was not considered by AO during the course of assessment-Enhancement is not valid. [S. 94(7), 251(1)(a)]
Frick India Ltd. v. DCIT (2022) 216 TTJ 146 (Delhi)(Trib.)S. 250 : Appeal-Commissioner (Appeals)-Procedure-Ex parte order-Order id set aside.
Shree Naurang Godavari Entertainment Ltd. v. ACIT (2022) 194 ITD 431 / 216 TTJ 853/ 212 DTR 129 (Mum.)(Trib.)