Revised ITR Filed on Post NCLT Order is Unreasonable and Not Condonable: Bombay HC [Read Order]
The Bombay High Court quashes the CBDT's order rejecting the application filed by CG Power and Industrial Solutions Ltd seeking condonation of delay...
![Non-Application of Mind: Calcutta HC quashes GST SCN against Coca Cola Bottler Diamond Beverages [Read Order]](https://www.taxscan.in/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/Coca-Cola-Bottler-Diamond-Beverages-ITC-TAXSCAN.jpg "Non-Application of Mind: Calcutta HC quashes GST SCN against Coca Cola Bottler Diamond Beverages [Read Order]")
![AO cant impose an Addition without mentioning any Provision of Statute: ITAT [Read Order]](https://www.taxscan.in/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/AO-impose-Addition-mentioning-Provision-Statute-ITAT-taxscan.jpg "AO cant impose an Addition without mentioning any Provision of Statute: ITAT [Read Order]")
No Recovery of Refunded Cess Amount by Revenue Department: J&K and Ladakh HC dismisses Appeal Filed with Delay of 1488 days [Read Order]
The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court dismissed appeal filed with delay of 1488 days and upheld the ruling that no recovery of refunded cess amount by the Revenue Department. The appeal by...
![No Recovery of Refunded Cess Amount by Revenue Department: J&K and Ladakh HC dismisses Appeal Filed with Delay of 1488 days [Read Order]](https://www.taxscan.in/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/No-Recovery-of-Refunded-Cess-Amount-Refunded-Cess-Amount-Revenue-Department-Jammu-and-Kashmir-and-Ladakh-High-Court-Appeal-Filed-taxscan.jpg "No Recovery of Refunded Cess Amount by Revenue Department: J&K and Ladakh HC dismisses Appeal Filed with Delay of 1488 days [Read Order]")
Revenue Department cannot Seize Cash that does not form Part of Stock in Trade in GST case: SC upholds Decision of Kerala HC [Read Judgement]
The Supreme Court of India upheld the decision of the Kerala High Court in Shabu George vs State Tax Officer wherein it was held that Revenue Department cannot seize cash that does not form part of...
![Revenue Department cannot Seize Cash that does not form Part of Stock in Trade in GST case: SC upholds Decision of Kerala HC [Read Judgement]](https://www.taxscan.in/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/Revenue-Department-Seize-Stock-Trade-GST-SC-Decision-Kerala-highcourt-TAXSCAN.jpg "Revenue Department cannot Seize Cash that does not form Part of Stock in Trade in GST case: SC upholds Decision of Kerala HC [Read Judgement]")
Sanctioned Refund Claim can be Adjusted to Any Dues of Excise Duty as per Section 11 of Central Excise Act: CESTAT [Read Order]
The Ahmedabad bench of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) held that the sanctioned refund claim can be adjusted to any dues of excise duty as per section 11 of the...
![Sanctioned Refund Claim can be Adjusted to Any Dues of Excise Duty as per Section 11 of Central Excise Act: CESTAT [Read Order]](https://www.taxscan.in/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/Sanctioned-Refund-Claim-can-be-Adjusted-to-Any-Dues-of-Excise-Duty-Refund-Claim-Dues-of-Excise-Duty-Excise-Duty-Central-Excise-Act-CESTAT-Taxscan.jpg "Sanctioned Refund Claim can be Adjusted to Any Dues of Excise Duty as per Section 11 of Central Excise Act: CESTAT [Read Order]")
Payment Received by Colgate Palmolive Malaysia from Colgate India to Access SAP System is not ’Royalty'; Not Taxable: Bombay HC [Read Order]
A Division Bench of Bombay High Court ruled that the payment received by the Colgate Palmolive Marketing SDN BHD, from the Colgate Palmolive (India) Limited to access the SAP system does not amount...
![Payment Received by Colgate Palmolive Malaysia from Colgate India to Access SAP System is not ’Royalty; Not Taxable: Bombay HC [Read Order]](https://www.taxscan.in/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/Payment-Received-by-Colgate-Palmolive-Malaysia-from-Colgate-India-Colgate-Palmolive-Malaysia-Colgate-Colgate-India-Bombay-High-Court-Taxscan.jpg "Payment Received by Colgate Palmolive Malaysia from Colgate India to Access SAP System is not ’Royalty; Not Taxable: Bombay HC [Read Order]")
Penalty u/s 96ZP of Excise Act not justifiable when Revenue Department delayed Computation of ACP: Orissa HC [Read Order]
In a recent ruling, the Orissa High Court (HC) held that the penalty under section 96ZP of the Central Excise Act was not justifiable when Revenue Department delayed the computation of the Annual...
![Penalty u/s 96ZP of Excise Act not justifiable when Revenue Department delayed Computation of ACP: Orissa HC [Read Order]](https://www.taxscan.in/wp-content/uploads/2023/01/Penalty-Excise-Act-Revenue-Department-ACP-Orissa-HC-TAXSCAN.jpg "Penalty u/s 96ZP of Excise Act not justifiable when Revenue Department delayed Computation of ACP: Orissa HC [Read Order]")
Payment of 25% of Penalty is adequate to Compensate Revenue Department: CESTAT sets aside Penalty under Rule 15(2) of CENVAT Credit Rules [Read Order]
The Chennai Bench of the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) while setting aside the penalty under Rule 15(2) of CENVAT Credit Rules has held that payment of 25% of the...
![Payment of 25% of Penalty is adequate to Compensate Revenue Department: CESTAT sets aside Penalty under Rule 15(2) of CENVAT Credit Rules [Read Order]](https://www.taxscan.in/wp-content/uploads/2022/12/Payment-Revenue-Department-CESTAT-Penalty-CENVAT-Credit-Rules-taxscan.jpg "Payment of 25% of Penalty is adequate to Compensate Revenue Department: CESTAT sets aside Penalty under Rule 15(2) of CENVAT Credit Rules [Read Order]")