AI-curated court updates, legal developments, and practice-area insights for Indian legal professionals.
The Allahabad High Court has approved bail for a businessman involved in a case of alleged fraudulent billing practices concerning the Goods and Services Tax. The court's order includes specific conditions for the grant of bail.
The Chhattisgarh High Court has granted bail to accused individuals in a case involving alleged fraudulent Input Tax Credit (ITC) worth Rs. 17.18 crore. The court concluded that additional custody was not necessary as the investigation was completed.
The Delhi High Court has ordered the release of jewellery and cash seized by the Income Tax Department, citing a shocking 13-year delay in their return and seeking explanations for the inaction.
The Himachal Pradesh High Court has allowed a delayed appeal against a GST demand of Rs. 28.54 lakh, requiring the taxpayer to deposit 50% of the assessed amount.
The Karnataka High Court has ruled that rental charges for Electronic Data Capture Terminals (EDCT machines) are subject to VAT, asserting that retaining ownership does not negate the transfer of the right to use.
The Chhattisgarh High Court has granted regular bail to accused individuals in an alleged GST e-way bill manipulation case after considering their clean criminal record and the absence of a charge sheet.
The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) ruled that the repurchase of unexercised Employee Stock Options (ESOPs) by Flipkart should be taxed under Long-Term Capital Gains (LTCG) rather than as a salary perquisite.
The Madras High Court has ruled that opting for a writ petition instead of a customs appeal does not constitute adequate grounds for delay in addressing customs matters, emphasizing strict adherence to procedural timelines.
CESTAT has reversed a customs demand, ruling that extended limitation periods cannot be applied in classification disputes, thereby preserving the rights of importers.
CESTAT has ruled that the absence of a challan is not sufficient grounds to deny a customs refund claim, thus emphasizing the importance of substantive claims over procedural deficiencies.
CESTAT Chennai has ruled that customs refund claims under Section 27 are invalid without a reassessment of the Bill of Entry. This decision clarifies the requirements for valid refund claims.
CESTAT Chandigarh has ruled that transaction values cannot be dismissed solely based on Directorate of Valuation guidelines without supporting evidence. This ruling underscores the importance of substantiation in customs valuations.
CESTAT has ruled that an importer is entitled to a 12% interest rate on delayed refunds for investigation deposits, modifying previous rulings that granted a lower rate. This decision sets a new precedent for interest calculations.