high court ruling - taxindiaonline.com · parle agro pvt ltd vs cct (dated: february 5, 2016)...

HIGH COURT RULING

2016-TIOL-636-HC-DEL-CACT

Telefonaktiebolaget Lm Ericsson Vs CCI (Dated: March 30, 2016)

Whether jurisdiction of the Commission to pass directions under Section 26(1) of the Competition Act for causing an investigation fall within the scope of judicial review under Article 226 - YES: HC

Whether there is any irreconcilable conflict between the Competition Act and the Patents Act when the patent laws define the contours of certain rights, and the anti-trust laws are essentially to prevent abuse of rights - NO: HC

Whether the intention of the Parliament is that both Competition Act and Pate nts Act should be worked and implemented in addition to and in not in derogation of other statues: YES: HC

Whether in absence of any irreconcilable conflict between the two legislations, the jurisdiction of CCI to entertain complaints for abuse of dominance in respect of Patent rights can be ousted - NO: HC

Whether as per proviso to Section 84(6)(iv) a patentee's anti-competitive conduct would have to be first established in proceedings under the Competition Act before the Controller of Patents could take that into account - NO: HC

Whether the Controller of Patents would be bound to take into account that the patent holder has indulged in anti-competitive practices, if the Commission has finally found a patentee's conduct to be anti-competitive and its finding has attained finality - YES: HC

Whether it amounts to abuse of dominance when a proprietor of SEPs is found pressuring an implementer to accept non FRAND terms - YES: HC

Whether an abuse of dominant position under Section 4 of the Competition Act is not a cause that can be made a subject matter of a suit or proceedings before a civil court - NO: HC

Whether a potential licensee, could without prejudice to his rights to challenge the validity of patents could take such steps or proceedings which are premised on the patents being valid - YES: HC

Whether orders passed by the Commission are perverse and lacks jurisdiction, when there are reasons to have prima facie opinion indicating abuse of dominance by the patent holder - NO: HC

2016-TIOL-630-HC-MAD-VAT

Shree Karthik Papers Ltd Vs ACCT (Dated : March 17, 2016)

Whether the State government is liable to refund the excess amount of tax paid by an assessee under 'Interest Free Sales Tax Deferreal Scheme', if the Government has extended the time for utlization of unutilized interest free sales tax loan - YES: HC

2016-TIOL-629-HC-P&H-VAT

Worlds Window Impex India Pvt Ltd Vs State Of Punjab (Dated: March 1, 2016)

Whether waiver of pre-deposit can be granted, only where the first appellate authority is satisfied that the purpose of appeal will be frustrated by allowing the condition of pre -deposit to continue as a condition precedent to the hearing of the appeal before it - YES: HC

2016-TIOL-623-HC-KAR-VAT

Kennametal India Ltd Vs Addl CCT (Dated: February 9, 2016)

Karnataka Value Added Tax - Denial of deduction claimed on annual turnover discount – Appeal against the order of revisional authority restoring the order of Assessing Authority.

Held: It is the case of the assessee that the provisions of KVAT Rules more particularly, Rule 3(2)(c) and the proviso thereof which was relied on by the Revisional Authority is not applicable to the facts of the present case - No contentions urged by the assessee are addressed by the revisional authority while concluding the revisional proceedings except following the Judgment of this Court in M/s Southern Motors. In view of the same, it would be appropriate to remit the matter back to the revisional authority to consider the matter afresh in the light of the contentions urged by the assessee and to pass appropriate orders in accordance with law - The revisional orders passed by the respondent are set-aside and the matters are remanded back to the respondent for fresh consideration. (paras 10 & 11).

2016-TIOL-621-HC-UKHAND-VAT

Reckitt Benckiser India Pvt Ltd Vs State Of Uttarakhand (Dated: February 24, 2016) Whether the input tax credit can be vouchsafed in respect of packing materials used in connection with finished products, which are stock transferred outside the State in course of inter-State trade or commerce - NO: HC

2016-TIOL-620-HC-MUM-VAT

State Of Maharashtra Vs King Furniture Works (Dated: March 15, 2016)

Whether the Government Officials can expect discretionary and equitable relief from the court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India when the explanation that they furnish is wholly unacceptable - NO: HC

Whether in case the court of law is expected to render justice expeditiously, in that case it should not be burdened with cases which have been brought belatedly and without any satisfactory and reasonable explanation for the delay - YES: HC

2016-TIOL-615-HC-DEL-VAT

M/s Gullu's Vs Commissioner, Trade and Taxes (Dated: March 14, 2016)

Whether it is permissible for an officer of the DT&T to collect cheque or cash at the time of survey, inspection or sealing proceedings under threat of sealing the premises under Section 60 of the DVAT Act - NO: HC

Whether any dealer can be coerced by the officers of the DT&T to make payment of any amount either towards alleged tax dues or otherwise either by cheque or cash at the time of a survey or inspection or any other proceeding including proceedings u/s 60 - NO: HC


M/s Techno Therm Industries Vs Check Post Officer (Dated: March 11, 2016) Whether in case the assessee is in the process of getting itself registered under the TNVAT Act, goods can be detained by the Revenue authority even if such goods are accompanied with proper invoice bill and also transport documents - NO: HC

2016-TIOL-613-HC-MUM-MISC-LB

ICICI Bank Ltd Vs Unimers India Ltd (Dated: March 7, 2016) Whether a bank appointed as debenture trustee by the borrower can file a suit on the original side of Civil Court when it is suing on behalf of the debenture holder for recovery of sums payable to such debenture holders - YES:HC

Whether such recovery action of the bank can be treated as a suit filed by such bank for recovery of the amount payable to itself - NO:HC

Whether a bank appointed as debenture trustees by the company issuing debentures qualifies within the meaning of Secured creditors u/s 2(zd) of Securitisation Act - NO:HC

Whether therefore Section 17 of the RDB Act which excludes the jurisdiction of Civil Courts in favour of the Debt Recovery Tribunal has no application - YES:HC

Whether the expansive definition of "Secured creditor" in Securitisation Act can be applied to expand the scope of financial institution under the RDB Act when the later Act has not been correspondingly amended - NO: HC

2016-TIOL-612-HC-KOL-VAT

Shiv Bhagwan Bagaria Vs STO (Dated: March 14, 2016) Whether when a limited order has been passed against the assessee for de-selecting from the e services of online generation of waybills, the approval and effective order of the Special Commissioner must be confined to only such aspect - YES: HC

2016-TIOL-611-HC-KERALA-VAT

Murugan Agencies Vs State Of Kerala (Dated: January 14, 2016) Whether if an assessee who has furnished bank guarantee in terms of the interim order passed is entitled to avail the benefits of such order, in that case the question of

unjust enrichment can arise since the assessee was enjoined only to furnish bank guarantee, would not be liable to have the same encashed - NO: HC

Whether state can be permitted to take advantage of a wrongful promise held out by it to deprive the assessee of the amounts that it would otherwise have been entitled to - NO: HC

2016-TIOL-595-HC-TRIPURA-CT

Voltas Ltd Vs State of Tripura (Dated: February 8, 2016) Whether a dealer can be said to have committed an offence under the State Sales tax Act by importing goods from foreign country, where the contract entered into by the dealer clearly shows that there was a stipulation regarding import of the items - NO: HC

Whether the State Government has legal competence to levy tax on goods which are imported from outside the State or a Country - NO: HC

Whether the Revenue Department can presume that an assessee had charged 20% tax over and above the contract value, in absence of any material on record to show the same - NO: HC


Fenesta Building Systems Vs Addl CCT (Dated: March 03, 2016) Whether the appellate authority under KVAT Act, 2003 while invoking his revisional power, is required to examine and deal with the point of limitation which is expressly raised by the assessee, before coming to conclusion - YES: HC

2016-TIOL-585-HC-AHM-VAT

Swiss Deziner Tiles Vs State Of Gujarat (Dated: March 17, 2016)

Whether detainment and seizure of the truck is without any authority of law, when truck is detained at a place other than the check-post or barrier and by an officer who is not an officer-in-charge of a check-post or barrier as contemplated u/s 68(4) of the GVAT Act - YES : HC 2016-TIOL-584-HC-AHM-VAT

Om Sai Associates Vs State Of Gujarat (Dated: March 14, 2016)

Whether if goods have been seized by the police and not at a check-post or a barrier as contemplated u/s 68(1), the Revenue officer is also not an officer-in-charge of a check-post or barrier as contemplated u/s 68(4), the concerned officer is not empowered to make seizure of such goods - NO: HC


Ravani Medical Store Vs UoI (Dated: March 11, 2016)

Gujarat VAT Act - short supply - inferior quality - deductions for over payment - reimbursement - pricing clause -

Whether while calculating the net payable amount by CGHS to the assessee entire VAT payable on the product should be reduced from MRP and then the discounted rates offered by the assessee could be applied - NO: HC

2016-TIOL-578-HC-KERALA-VAT

Parle Agro Pvt Ltd Vs CCT (Dated: February 5, 2016)

Whether the product 'Appy Fizz' can be treated as a 'Fruit Juice Based Drink' under the Central Excise and Salt Act, when it comes squarely within the specific entry, i.e., 'aerated branded soft drink' as contained u/s 6(1)(a) of Kerela VAT Act and has been specifically made liable to tax @ 20% - NO: HC 2016-TIOL-577-HC-AHM-MISC

Ritesh Oil Mills Pvt Ltd Vs Dena Bank (Dated: February 17, 2016)

Whether an order passed by Recovery Officer would be appealable u/s 30 of RBBD Act, if such order has a substantial potential to adversely affect a party or injure his rights - YES: HC

Whether a defaulter can appeal to the DRAT u/s 30 of RBBD Act, on ground of nonservice of notice or material irregularity in publishing or conducting the sale of defaulter's property - YES: HC


B Kolandaivel Vs CTO (Dated: March 7, 2016)

Whether the consignment of goods delivered by the assessee can be detained without assessing the relevant documents, merely on the basis that the goods dealt with are banned - NO: HC


Venus Decors Vs CTO (Dated: February 25, 2016)

Whether though the Revenue has given sufficient opportunity to the assessee to produce the documents in the interest of justice, it can be given one more opportunity to produce all the documents available with them and the Revenue can be directed to decide the matter afresh - YES: HC

2016-TIOL-567-HC-MUM-MISC

M/s Kalyani Exporters Vs Indusland Bank (Dated: January 14, 2016)

Whether relief can be granted to Petitioner in a writ petition to challenge judgment

that had attained finality - No: HC

Whether Court in exercise of its writ jurisdiction can give relief to petitioner who is a defaulter and who was given ample opportunities to repay the sums or at least to abide by the statutory conditions and the Petitioner knew that there are pending legal proceedings for recovery of sums and all defences could be raised therein - No: HC


Siemens Ltd Vs Department Of Trade And Taxes (Dated: March 16, 2016)

Whether in case an assessee has already paid the tax and interest, can he be denied the benefit available under the Amnesty Scheme only because penalty is the subject matter of a challenge made by the assessee before Appellate Tribunal - NO: HC 2016-TIOL-560-HC-ALL-CT

Vadilal Enterprises Ltd Vs State Of Up (Dated: January 8, 2016)

Whether the goods mentioned in the certificate of registration granted u/s 8(3)(b) of CST if purchased from outside the State of U.P, is entitled to concessional rate of tax upon issuance of Form -C by the AO - YES: HC

Whether a registered dealer is entitled to issuance of Form 'C', if he purchases goods from outside the State and the said goods are mentioned in the registration certificate issued u/s 8(3)(b) of CST - YES: HC

Whether application made by a dealer for issuance of Form 'C' can be denied on the ground of amendment of registration certificate, in case the said applications are pending prior to the amendment of registration certificate - NO: HC


Tata Power Delhi Distribution Ltd Vs CST (Dated: March 11, 2016)

Whether a transaction of lease occasioning the movement of goods from one state to another, which was an inter-state 'deemed' sale, could be declared to be an intra-state sale, in case the goods are located within the state at the time of transfer of the right to use the goods - NO: HC

Whether it can be said that the situs of the sale is where the agreement to sell is entered, if the goods are available in the State and the agreement for transfer of the property in goods from the seller to the buyer is executed at that place - YES: HC


Nokia India Sales Pvt Ltd Vs ACCT (Dated: July 15, 2015)

Whether an entity being a SEZ unit, is entitled to exemption from levy of purchase tax on the interstate stock transfer effected from warehouse located in SEZ, in case the assessee is not authorised for carrying out such transfer within SEZ - NO: HC

2016-TIOL-543-HC-KAR-CT

CTO Vs Ifb Industries Ltd (Dated: February 15, 2016)

Whether once a decision in any matter by the court is taken, it cannot be challenged on the ground that subsequently the higher forum has taken a different view - YES : HC

2016-TIOL-542-HC-GUW-VAT

Mukesh Carriers Vs State Of Assam (Dated: February 23, 2016)

Whether the worth of the documents produced by the transporter should have been weighed by the authorities to determine whether convincing evidence is brought on record to rebut the legal presumption of deemed sale u/s 46(15)(d) - YES: HC

2016-TIOL-539-HC-DEL-MISC

Qarshi Industries Pvt Ltd Vs Abdul Mueed (Dated: February 29, 2016) Whether interim injunction can be granted against usage of a mark when plaintiff has concealed certain important facts in the plaint and written statements of the defendant is pending - NO : HC

Whether interim relief in a suit for alleged passing off can be given when there exists no prima facie face in favour of the plaintiff - NO : HC

2016-TIOL-538-HC-KOL-VAT

Maple Exports Pvt Ltd Vs ADDL CST (Dated: February 24, 2016) Whether assessee, seeking input tax credit is not obliged thereunder to take any responsibility for his seller's valid registration - YES:HC

2016-TIOL-529-HC-DEL-CA

International Tractors Ltd Vs Punjab Tractors Ltd (Dated: February 29, 2016)

Whether a suit filed against a company for alleged copyright infringment abates once such company is merged or amalgamated with another existing company - NO : HC

Whether a "company dies" upon amalgamation with another company within the meaning of Order XXII Rule 3 of CPC - NO: HC

Whether Order XXII Rule 10 CPC and not Order XXII Rules 3 & 4 CPC would apply in case of amalgamation - YES : HC


M/s Rudrapathy Mudaliar & Co Vs Deputy Commissioner (CT) (Dated: February 8, 2016)

Whether when the Commissioner has not taken into consideration the contentions raised by the assessee and summarily rejected the application for adjustment of amount paid, even without affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, the order so passed is tenable in law - NO: HC

2016-TIOL-520-HC-GUW-VAT

Assam Silicate Glass & Chemical Works Vs State Of Assam (Dated: March 1, 2016) Whether the determination of any question u/s 105(2) of the VAT Act, can’t be made without due application of mind, to the implication of the entries of the C.E. Tariff Act - YES: HC

Whether deciding higher rate of tax at the instance of a new manufacturer, who is exempted from tax to make the Ruling applicable to those who are not exempted from tax, can be said to be a correct approach - NO: HC


Satguru Oils Pvt Ltd Vs DCTO (Dated: January 18, 2016)

Whether when transit pass which was manually generated was produced at time of check and transaction was inter-state in nature, then DCTO cannot demand tax as if the transaction is meant for local sale - YES:HC

Whether for not affixing the signature of the Consignor or Consignee, only a sum of Rs.2,000/- (Rupees Two Thousand only) can be imposed as fine - YES:HC

2016-TIOL-507-HC-MAD-CT

Ennore Foundries Ltd Vs State Of Tamil Nadu (Dated: March 9, 2016)

Whether the ITAT is supposed to get into the document and confront the assessee with the discrepancies between the figures found in the balance sheet and what was furnished to the Team of Enforcement Wing - NO: HC Whether where a party before a quasi judicial Tribunal, voluntarily invites the attention of the Tribunal to a document, the Tribunal is entitled to come to its own conclusion from what was produced - YES: HC

Whether it is part of the principles of natural justice to expect the Tribunal to confront the person producing the document with what is found by the Tribunal - NO: HC


Sunrise Chennai Distributors Pvt Ltd Vs CTO (Dated: February 15, 2016)

Whether when there is a clear question of non application of mind to a very important fact by the AO, both in the original order and in the order passed under Section 84, then assessee could not have been driven to remedy of revision under Section 54 - YES:HC


Engineers India Ltd Vs DCCT (Dated: March 4, 2016)

Whether where the original notice proposing to levy tax under CST Act did not contain the grounds on which the assessment order has been passed thereby indicating the detailed objections filed by the assessees, the matter requires restoration for considera tion afresh - YES: HC 2016-TIOL-497-HC-MAD-VAT

Hotel Juha Regency Vs ACCT (Dated: March 2, 2016)

Whether the order are liable to be set aside when Department had rejected the objections aised by assessee, without reason - YES:HC


Badani Jewellers Vs Deputy Commissioner (CT) (Dated: January 4, 2016)

Whether when the DCTO has failed to provide a copy of the compounding notice, then on filing of such revision to the authority concerned, it shall entertain the same without raising any issue relating to limitation - YES: HC 2016-TIOL-492-HC-MAD-VAT

Labindia Instruments Pvt Ltd Vs CTO (Dated: February 29, 2016)

Whether it is in violation of principles of natural justicethe, when CTO passes an order even before the expiry of the 15 days, which is time granted in the notice - YES: HC


State Of Gujarat Vs ONGC Ltd (Dated: October 17, 2015) Whether processing and transportation charges received before the actual delivery has to be included in the 'sale price' as per section 2(29) – Yes: HC

Whether assessee is entitled to exemption from payment of sales tax under the Act, 1969 as per Entry No.33 of the Schedule to the exemption notification issued under section 49(2) of the Act, 1969 where the sale of kerosene to Oil Marketing Companies was for use of public distribution system – Yes: HC

Whether assessee is entitled to exemption in respect of sales of LPG to various Oil Marketing Companies to the extent of sale to any other specified company in bulk for domestic use - Yes: HC

Whether assessee is liable to pay the value added tax under the VAT Act, 2003 from 03.10.2008 onwards in respect of the sales of the LPG in bulk to various Oil Marketing Companies – Yes: HC

Whether assessee is entitled to exemption from tax on the inter-State sales of LPG effected by it from the State of Gujarat to other States – No: HC

Whether penalty u/s 45(2)(c) of Gujarat Sales Act, 1969 is leviable where assessee has not concealed the particulars of any transaction or deliberately furnished inaccurate particulars of any transaction liable to tax – No: HC


Britannia Industries Ltd Vs DCCT (Dated: March 1, 2016) Whether the HC can allow a petition in part, when for the other issues, the assessee has got appeal remedy - YES:HC

2016-TIOL-473-HC-ALL-VAT

M/s Flipkart India Pvt Ltd Vs State of UP (Dated: February 29, 2016)

Whether provisions of Section 17 (14) (a) of the VAT Act, makes it obligatory upon the registering authority to carry out the amendment irrespective of the fact that the application was not furnished within the prescribed period as provided under Section 75 - YES: HC

Whether the application for change of place of business was rightly filed by the assessee under Section 75 - YES: HC

Whether the rule of alternative remedy is not a bar for entertaining the writ petition, especially when there is a total abdication by the Department in adhering to the process of service of summons under Rule 72 of the Rules - YES: HC

Whether there is no proper service of the summons, when the Assessing Authority has not adopted the procedure as per clause (j) and (k) of Rule 72 of the Rules - YES: HC

Whether limitation could not start from the date, when there was no valid service of the assessment orders upon the assessee, as the assessment orders were served by affixation at the old principal place of business - YES: HC

Whether the recall application is to be filed within 30 days of the order on the application for setting aside the ex-parte assessment order, which could only be entertained if it is supported by proof of deposit of the admitted tax by the dealer - YES: HC


Kamal Trading Company Vs State Of Punjab (Dated: February 23, 2016)

Whether when the vehicle driver has lost the documents in transit & has not informed the assessee and stopped the vehicle, it is possible for such an assessee to urge that the order passed by Revenue authority considering the assessee as defaulter in incorrect - NO: ITAT


Conell Bros Co India Pvt Ltd Vs State Of Punjab (Dated: February 19, 2016)

Whether when it has been proved with documentary evidence before the Revenue authority that there was no malafide intention on the part of assessee for delay in filing of an appeal, can such delay be condoned - YES: HC


Maltex Fashions Pvt Ltd Vs CCT (Dated: February 22, 2016)

Whether if the person manning office of the Commissioner at a time is different from the time when the power is actually exercised in capacity as the Commissioner, in that case the relevant aspects of case needs to be considered again upon the request made by assessee for review of the clarification - YES: HC 2016-TIOL-453-HC-AHM-VAT

Viksun Steel Co Vs State Of Gujarat (Dated: February 22, 2016)

Whether once the reassessment orders is passed the provisional attachment would no longer remain in force and, therefore, the Revenue should ensure that the attachment of the bank accounts of the assessee be forthwith lifted - YES : HC


Vanco Exports Vs ACCT (Dated: February 12, 2016)

Whether when the assessee was not granted any opportunity of being heard as contemplated u/s 2294), the assessee was not issued with any notice prior to the passing of the order made against him, such an order of Tribunal is valid - NO: HC 2016-TIOL-443-HC-MAD-VAT

Bismillah Industrial Steel Suppliers Vs ACCT (Dated: January 4, 2016) Whether if there was no reference about the issuance of notice and service of the same on assessee in the order passed, it clearly demonstrates that no pre-assessment notice was served on the assessee before passing the assessment order - YES: HC


Firoze Fabricators Vs Assistant Commissioner, (CT) (Dated: February 17, 2016 )

Whether when the assessee has got an appeal remedy available to challenge the issues that the revenue should have considered the excise duty mentioned in the invoice, which cannot be regarded as turnover for the purpose of assessment to levy of tax and penalty, can the Revenue deny to claim input tax credit - NO: HC


Progressive Alloys (India) Pvt Ltd Vs Commissioner of Trade And Taxes(Dated: February 3, 2016 ) Whether it is conceivable that when the computerised system verifies the match in respect of purchase transactions, the Revenue authority treats those very transactions as having been made from 'bogus/suspicious' dealers whose registrations have been cancelled - NO: HC

Whether where the registration of a dealer has been cancelled for whatever reason, the computerised system cannot possibly verify the matching of Annexures in respect of the transactions involving such dealer - YES: HC

Whether order for levy of penalty u/s 33 & 86(14) of DVAT can be sustained, where such order was passed without application of mind by the concerned VAT authority and by merely resorting to machine generated orders which were unsigned - NO: HC

2016-TIOL-425-HC-DEL-MISC

Cellular Operators Association of India Vs Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (Dated: February 29, 2016) Whether regulations framed by TRAI under section 36 of the TRAI Act to address the problem of repeated call drops for improving the quality of services extended to the consumers by the service providers is ultra vires - NO: HC

Whether such regulations are beyond the scope of the regulation making power conferred on TRAI - NO: HC

Whether the mandate under the impugned regulations that the service provider shall compensate the consumer for three call drops per day is manifestly arbitrary and unreasonable - NO:HC

Whether the impugned regulations is in violation of delegated legislation when the regulations have been framed in exercise of the power conferred under Section 36 of the TRAI Act keeping in mind the paramount interest of the consumers - NO: HC


Wep Peripherals Ltd Vs State of Karnataka (Dated: February 17, 2016) Whether where the assessee has failed to discharge his burden of filing declaration to show that goods concerned are not transferred to any other place of business, it is not open to him to contend that no declaration is required to be filed since it is not a case of transfer of stock - YES: HC


Red Giant Movies Vs State Of Tamil Nadu (Dated: February 5, 2016)

Whether where the assessee has mentioned the title of its movie in Tamil in the application submitted by it for claiming grant of exemption from entertainment tax on the Tamil movies, the title mentioned under covering letter and Censor Certificate in English have no relevance - YES: HC

Whether such assessee is entitled to refund of the entertainment tax so collected by the Revenue authorities, by merely following the covering letter and censor certificate which are irrelevent for the purpose of granting exemption - YES: HC


Ashok Leyland Ltd Vs State of Tamil Nadu (Dated: January 11, 2016)

Whether the decision regarding a vehicle, which was a cabin built for the driver on the trailer or lorry chassis, can be taken considering the same as tractor, even when the Tribunal has not properly considered the evidence on record - NO: HC


Stovekraft Pvt Ltd Vs Addl CCT (Dated: February 18, 2016)

Whether if the reasons for making assessment are not recorded by a quasi judicial authority, the same would not only result into breach of principles of natural justice, but it would also be difficult for the higher forum to examine the ground on which the final operative Order is passed - YES: HC

2016-TIOL-389-HC-MUM-CA

Aditya Thakkar (Dated: January 4, 2016)

Whether rights of an employee are prejudiced due to unexplained delay when he has been suspended from services and enquiry took place after 8 years - YES: HC

Whether all the benefits including increments and promotion should be given to such an employee when misconduct against him could not be proved - YES: HC


Lotus Impex Vs Commissioner, Department of Trade and Taxes (Dated: February 19, 2016)

Whether in case the assessee has to approach the High Court for refund due to it in terms of Section 38, the move of the Department of Trade and Taxes to raise fresh demands of tax and penalty against the assessee appears to be an abuse of the process of law - YES: HC


M/s S M Constructions Vs State of Punjab (Dated: February 15, 2016)

Whether an order to issue the certificate of no deduction and for putting a restriction from initiating any action on various clients of the assessee for not effecting TDS, can be levied without providing any opportunity of being heard - NO: HC


Krishna Industries Vs State of Gujarat (Dated: February 5, 2016)

Whether when there was no delay in filing of exemption application on the part of assessee, the certificate was issued belatedly by the Commission, can the assessee

dealer be held ineligible to claim exemption on such default on the part of Revenue - NO: HC


Singla Builders And Promoters Ltd Vs State of Punjab (Dated: January 21, 2016)

Whether the power to grant interim protection or injunction to the assessee by the first appellate authority in case of undue hardship is legal and binding - YES: HC

Whether in case the assessees had filed an appeal without filing an application for interim injunction for the appeals which are still pending, the same can be dismissed by the adjudicating authorities for want of pre -deposit - YES: HC


United Telelinks (Bangalore) Ltd Vs Commissioner of Trade and Taxes (Dated: February 22, 2016)

Whether when it is clear that there are distinct proceedings envisaged under the DVAT Act as far as levy of penalty is concerned, the assessment and penalty proceedings can be combined in one order - NO: HC


Tilak Ram Babu Ram Pvt Ltd Vs State Of Haryana (Dated: January 29, 2016)

Whether an assessee deserves a direction to be passed to the Revenue Department to dispose of a refund application filed by the assessee, by passing a speaking order within a reasonable time, in case the Revenue has paid no heed towards such refund claim inspite of several reminders - YES: HC


Anaparai Estates Ltd Vs State Of Karnataka (Dated: February 3, 2016)

Whether when there is no understatement of tax liability made by the assessee, the same are disclosed in the returns to claim input tax deductions, in such circumstances, the AO can levy penalty treating it as a mandatory levy - NO: HC 2016-TIOL-366-HC-KAR-VAT

SSPDL Interserve Pvt Ltd Vs DCCT (Dated: February 12, 2016)

Whether case be remanded on the question of rate of tax to be levied on work contract for iron and steel for consideration of certain imporatant legal aspects - YES : HC


Bharat Bijlee Ltd Vs CTT (Dated: February 18, 2016) Whether a single Member of the Appellate Tribunal, Value Added Tax (AT) can legitimately function as the AT in terms of Section 73(1) of the Delhi Value Added Tax Act, 2004 – Yes: HC Whether AT ceases to function only because there is no notification specifically issued by the GNCTD constituting such a n AT – No: HC


Sahib Steel Industries Vs State Of Punjab (Dated: January 27, 2016) Whether if a false invoice has been shown regarding the transaction by sister concern whereas the goods were purchased from any other entity without any payment of tax and without invoice, assessee also failed to produce any document subsequently, it shows clear intent to evade taxes - YES: HC


Ambuja Cements Ltd Vs State Of Punjab (Dated: January 21, 2016) Whether the power to grant interim protection or injunction by the first appellate authority in appropriate cases can be given in case of undue hardship, is legal and valid - YES: HC


M/s Tirupathi Traders Vs Addl.CCT (Dated: February 16, 2016)

Whether if the person to whom goods were sold has returned the same as the material was found to be of inferior quality, in such case application of mind on the part of the Commissioner is required before reaching the conclusion that the say of assessee for return of the sales can be accepted - YES: HC

2016-TIOL-343-HC-AHM-MISC

Tarsangji Manglaji Thakor Vs State of Gujarat (Dated: February 17, 2016)

Whether mere possession receipt issued by the Circle Officer in favour of the Sales Tax Department would establish that the possession of the land was actually taken over by the acquiring authorities from the assessees - NO: HC


M/s Balaji Trading Company Vs State of Haryana (Dated: January 27, 2016)

Whether when the assessee relies upon genuine documents to substantiate that transaction with the Government organization was bonafide, can the Tribunal pass an order without examining the entire material on record before concluding whether there was any attempt to evade tax on the part of the dealer - NO: HC


M/s Arihant Unitech Reality Projects Ltd Vs Assistant Commissioner (CT) (Dated: January 19, 2016)

Whether the matter requires restoration, where the Revenue authorities have passed the assessment proceedings leving tax & penalty, without granting any opportunity of personal hearing and extension of time as claimed by assessee - YES: HC

2016-TIOL-322-HC-MAD-LMT

Shri Srijit C Vs CESTAT (Dated: January 7, 2016)

Limitation Act 1963, Section 5 - Delay in preferring appeal - Condonation of delay - Sufficient cause - CESTAT ought to adopt pragmatic approach in dealing with applications seeking Condonation of delay - 217 days of delay occasioned due to no fault of applicant but due to non-service of summons - No material on record to conclude that the applicant wantonly evaded summons - CESTAT ought to have considered reasonable explanation offered in condoning the delay - Order set aside - Delay condoned.


Chhabra Traders Vs State Of Punjab (Dated: January 21, 2016)

Whether non - apperance on medical ground could be valid reason, to challenge an ex parte order for not following a principles of natural justice - YES : HC

2016-TIOL-311-HC-AHM-CT

Hybrid Financial Service Ltd Vs State of Gujarat (Dated: February 5, 2016)

Whether if the claim of interest is statutorily recognized u/s 54 and it gives an assessee's right to seek refund, such right can be repudiated by the authority without giving any opportunity of being heard to the assessee - NO: HC

2016-TIOL-310-HC-MUM-VAT

Johnson Matthey Chemicals India Pvt Ltd Vs State Of Maharashtra (Dated: February 16, 2016)

Whether the requirement of furnishing the declaration in form 'F' is mandatory- Yes: HC Whether in case of transfer of goods claimed otherwise than by way of sale, the assessee is bound to furnish declaration in Form F – Yes: HC


Hari Rai Vs CTT (Dated: February 12, 2016)

Whether the cart pullers are entitled for claiming release of cartons which were detained by the Department of Trade & taxes, in case those cartons contains jewellery & cash worth of crores and the pullers have failed to furnish any information in respect of such cartons during inspection - NO: HC

2016-TIOL-303-HC-RAJ-VAT

Assistant Commissioner Vs M/s P N Agarwal and Co (Dated: January 7, 2016) Whether when a revision petition is originally filed at Jaipur Bench of the High Court and was transferred to the Principal Seat at Jodhpur, the same could be decided alongwith the an earlier petition - NO: HC

2016-TIOL-299-HC-RAJ-CT

CTO Vs Suzuki Textiles Ltd (Dated: January 28, 2016) Whether the 'packing material' which is used for packing the cloth, can be seperately subjected to tax - NO: HC

2016-TIOL-296-HC-MUM-CA

Sridhar Sundararajan Vs Ultramarine and Pigments (Dated: February 8, 2016)

Whether, after the amendment of the Companies Act in 2013, any Managing Director who was appointed prior to the Amendment Act would have a right to continue to act as Managing Director after his attaining the age of 70 years without special general resolution passed by the Company - NO - HC

Whether a director would cease to continue as Managing Director in a case where additional disqualification is added to the Section after his initial appointment, when the disqualification operates as cesession or discontinuation to work as Managing Director - YES - HC

Whether a provision introduced through Amendment Act of 2013 can said to have retrospective application when the disqualification is not on the eligibility criterion of the managing director as per which he was appointed originally prior to the amendment, but only on the criterion for continuation to work as managing director - NO - HC

Whether the language of section 196(3)(a) makes any distinction between the Managing Directors who have been appointed before 01/04/2014 and those after 01/04/2014 - NO - HC

Also see analysis of the order


Asst Commercial Taxes Officer Vs M/s Ram Deen Bhanwar Lal Upadhyay (Dated: January 7, 2016)

Whether penalty u/s 78(5) of Rajasthan Sales tax Act can be levied on a registered dealer, where both the CIT(A) & the ITAT has concluded that the bills produced by assessee sufficiently matches with the goods in transit and the same was purchased from a a registered dealer only - NO: HC

2016-TIOL-293-HC-P&H-MISC

M/s Laxmi Sadan Vs State of Haryana (Dated: December 7, 2015)

Whether the services provided by assessee in the shape of open space termed as “banquet halls” for marriages/receptions fall under the definition of 'luxury' so as to be liable to levy of tax in terms of Sections 2(j) and 2(k) - YES: HC

Whether if once there exists legislative competence in the State legislature to enact a provision, in the absence of the counsel for assessees to demonstrate that the same is arbitrary, discriminatory or violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India, can it be declared unconstitutional - NO: HC


CTO Vs M/s D K Gwar Udyog (Dated: January 7, 2016)

Whether penalty be imposed, when transaction has been fully disclosed in books of accounts, supported by invoices and no misuse of declaration Form ST -17 is found - NO : HC


Tvl Times Internet Ltd Vs ADCCT (Dated: January 7, 2016)

Whether an issue challenging the order of the VAT authorities are required to be remitted to the concerned appellate authority only, by directing the assessee to file an appeal before the said authority, in case the period of limitation for filing appeal has not expired - YES: HC


Kellogg India Pvt Ltd Vs Asst Commissioner (CT) (Dated: January 7, 2016) Whether when the assessee has failed to submit the copy of statutory forms filed along with the return, can the assessment be made without considering the plea of assessee - NO: HC


Bhupinder Auto International Vs CTT (Dated: January 29, 2016)

Whether the action of Revenue authorities in proceeding to seal the premises of assessee, almost in continuation of the action u/s 59 of DVAT Act, and only for the failure to produce books of accounts, without anything more, is unsustainable - YES:

HC


Mi Steel Processing India Pvt Ltd Vs Asst Commissioner (CT) (Dated: January 11, 2016)

VAT - Whether consequential order passed by Appellate Authority in Stay Petition is without jurisdiction, nullity and non-est in the eye of law, when Appellate Authority holds that there is no jurisdiction to adjudicate the issues raised?. YES: The issue relating to jurisdiction may govern issues relating to territorial jurisdiction, jurisdiction over subject matter and jurisdiction over the persons concerned. So far as this case is concerned the jurisdiction is with reference to the subject matter itself. When the second respondent held that there is no jurisdiction to adjudicate on the issues raised, then the consequential orders passed are also without jurisdiction and it is a nullity. It is settled law that any order passed without jurisdiction is non-est in the eye of law.. - para 14

Whether, as a consequence, amount paid by appellant while filing appeal and on Stay Order, to be returned to the appellant? YES: The second respondent should have ordered the return of amount which was already paid by the appellant herein. - para 14


2016-TIOL-249-HC-DEL-CT

ICICI Bank Ltd Vs CTT (Dated: January 29, 2016)

Whether if the time period for filing an appeal by the assessee against the order of Tribunal is yet to expire, in that case, the extreme step of attaching the Petitioner's bank account can be taken - NO: HC


Fresh and Honest Cafe Ltd Vs ASST Commissioner (CT) (Dated: January 18, 2016)

Whether if the Revenue officers pass assessment orders even before expiry of the time limit granted under the notices, such course adopted by the revenue, can be considered as passed in accordance of the principles of natural justice - NO: HC


Siemens Ltd Vs Commissioner Dept Of Trade And Taxes (Dated: February 2, 2016)

Whether in case the reason given for delay in making refund is that the file was under submission to the Additional Commissioner for payment verification, orders for such refund has to be passed immediately - YES: HC


Ingram Micro India Pvt Ltd Vs Commissioner, Department of Trade and Taxes (Dated: February 1, 2016)

Whether in case there is a valid explanation offered regarding the mistake made by the assessee in not including the inter-state purchases in the revised returns filed, the authorities appear to be satisfied that these are genuine inter-state purchase transactions with no adverse impact on the revenue of the State, can the assessee be held as a defaulter - NO: HC

2016-TIOL-235-HC-MUM-CT

CST Vs M/s Veer Radios (Dated: January 7, 2016)

Whether in case the return of income is filed belatedly by the assessee, it does not give correct and complete figures, in that case the provisions of Section 33(3) can be applied by the department to such return filed - YES:HC

2016-TIOL-234-HC-DEL-MISC-LB

Data Infosys Ltd Vs Infosys Technologies Ltd (Dated: February 5, 2016)

Whether Section 124 indicates that jurisdiction of Intellectual Appellate Board (IPAB) is conditional upon the civil court's determination of the prima facie tenability of the invalidity plea - NO:HC

Whether there is a clear bar on the jurisdiction of the Civil Courts on the issue of examination of merits of a plea of invalidity of a trademark - YES: HC

Whether access to IPAB to invoke its exclusive jurisdiction to test the invalidity of a trademark registration is precluded or barred when the civil court based on its prima facie assessment states the the invalidity plea is not tenable or where the litigant does not approach the IPAB within the time granted - NO:HC

Whether the only consequence of doing so is deemed abandonment of the invalidity defense in the infringement suit - YES:HC



Sri Karthi Cement Agencies Vs CTO (Dated: January 7, 2016)

Whether if an assessee was aggrieved by the order of Appellate Deputy Commissioner dismissing the statutory appeal filed by assessee, the said order has to be challenged before the appropriate authority in the manner known to law, instead of filing a writ before the High Court - YES: HC


Shubh Steel Vs Commissioner of Vat (Dated: January 27, 2016)

Whether a property which has been sealed pursuant to an inspection has to be de sealed within 48 hours of the sealing after taking custody of any documents, records, registers, books of accounts or goods lying in the premises of assessee - YES: HC


Sri Anjaneya Agro Tech Pvt Ltd Vs DCCT (Dated: January 20, 2016)

Whether when there is no dispute that the assessee was entitled to full tax rebate by virtue of a High Court decision, would it be just and fair to direct the revenue to consider the prayer of the petitioner for rectification - YES: HC


M Abdul Latheef Vs CTO (Dated: January 11, 2016)

Whether on failure of not providing an opportunity of personal hearing, the orders passed by adjudicating authority are liable for rejection as the principles of natural justice were not followed - YES: HC

2016-TIOL-228-HC-MUM-MISC

Pralhad @ Pratap Vs State Of Maharasthra (Dated: January 27, 2016)

Whether an application for anticipatory bail deserves acceptance in cases of embezzlement of huge public money - NO: HC

high court ruling - taxindiaonline.com · parle agro pvt ltd vs cct (dated: february 5, 2016)...

Documents