Monday, March 8, 2010

GOODS AND SERVICE TAX REPORTS (GSTR) HIGHLIGHTS ISSUE DATED 8.3.2010 Volume 1 Part 10

GOODS AND SERVICE TAX REPORTS (GSTR) HIGHLIGHTS

ISSUE DATED 8.3.2010

Volume 1 Part 10


SUPREME COURT


F Import of gold and silver with forged licences, period of limitation extended : Commissioner of Customs (Preventive) v. Aafloat Textiles (I) P. Ltd. and others . . . 453
F Even when motive behind false representation is not bad, if party making representation knows it to be false and injury ensues therefrom, it is fraud : Commissioner of Customs (Preventive) v. Aafloat Textiles (I) P. Ltd. and others . . . 453
F Denial of exemption claimed on components imported for repair of occean-vessela without disclosing sale of such imported parts, proper : Sanghvi Reconditioners P. Ltd. v. Union of India and others. . 467

HIGH COURT JUDGMENT

F Where plea of undue hardship not substantiated by material, order for pre-deposit for hearing of appeal justified : Mudhar Plywood P. Ltd. v. Union of India and others (P&H) . . . 423

F Clearance from wild life authorities in India not required for import of items not found in Wildlife Protection Act, 1972 : Union of India v. Entrack International Trading P. Ltd. (Delhi) . . . 428
F Where failure to include items in bills of entry by importer due to bona fide reasons, direction for return confiscated items on payment of duty : Union of India v. Entrack International Trading P. Ltd. (Delhi) . . . 428
F Where no material to show that various deposits adjusted towards duty and duty remained unpaid on date of filing of declaration under Kar Vivad Samadhan Scheme, rejection of application not justified : Arviva Industries (India) Ltd. v. Union of India and another (Bom) . . . 436
F Where service rendered to overseas customer not liable to tax and proof produced to show that no service tax collected from customer, assessee entitled to refund : Natraj and Venkat Associates v. Assistant Commissioner, Service Tax, Chennai II Division (Mad) . . 462
F Relevancy of statements made before Central Excise Officer under certain circumstances : Section 9D of Central Excise Act, 1944 not arbitrary or unconstitutional : J & K Cigarettes Ltd. and others v. Collector of Central Excise and others (Delhi) . . 482

CESTAT ORDERS

F Section 111(f) of Customs Act, 1962 applicable in case of omission to manifest tug : Vamsee Overseas Marine P. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Customs, Chennai . . . 420
F Photocopier main-frame not a photocopier, import permissible under Open General Licence : Phototech Enterprises v. Commissioner of Customs, Trichy . . . 442
F Where expert opinion misconceived and cannot be relied on, reduction of declared value proposed in show-cause notice by Commissioner not distrubed : Phototech Enterprises v. Commissioner of Customs, Trichy . . . 442
F Determination of annual production capacity of furnace : Invoice of modified capacity of furnace not a substitute for invoice of furnace issued by manufacturer at time of installation of furnace : VVS Concast Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Kanpur . . 445


--
Me on net :
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
http://rajkumaratthenet.blogspot.com/
http://itronline.blogspot.com/

Virus Warning: Although the I have taken reasonable precautions to ensure no viruses are present in his email, sender (I) cannot accept responsibility for any loss or damage arising from the use of this email or attachment."

No comments:

Post a Comment