Burden To Prove That Best Assessment By Income Tax Authorities Is Perverse Is On Assesee: Allahabad High Court

The Allahabad High Court has held that the burden to prove that the findings of best assessment done by the authorities is perverse is on the assesee. The bench of Justice Shekhar B. Saraf and Justice Praveen Kumar Giri held that “when a best assessment is done, it is for the assessee to bring on record the facts that may reveal that the findings are perverse in nature.” Appellant filed the Income Tax Appeal against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal who upheld the...

Venue Is Construed As Seat In Absence Of Contrary Indicia, If Arbitration Agreement Only Mentions 'Venue': Allahabad HC

The Allahabad High Court has held that when only one place is mentioned in the arbitration agreement and is termed as “venue”, the same is to be treated as the “seat” also, unless something contrary is mentioned in the agreement.“If the arbitration agreement mentions only one place and even if it is termed as the 'venue', then unless there is a contrary indicia the 'venue' is construed as the 'seat',” held Justice Jaspreet Singh. Applicant filed an application for appointment of arbitrator under...

[Income Tax] Filing Of Form 10-IC Prior To Filing Of Return Not Mandatory, Delay May Be Condoned In “Genuine Hardship”: Allahabad High Court

The Allahabad High Court has held that filing of Form 10-IC prior to filing of income tax return is not mandatory and the delay in filing the Form may be condoned in cases where “genuine hardship” is shown to exist. Form 10-IC, under the Income Tax Act, is required to filed only if a Domestic Company chooses to pay tax at concessional rate of 22% under Section 115BAA of the Income Tax Act,1961. Section 115BAA provides that subject to the provisions of Chapter XII of the Income Tax Act,...

Mere Absence Of Activity At Principal Place Of Business Doesn't Mean Invoices Issued To Assessee Are Fake: Allahabad High Court

The Allahabad High Court has held that merely because there was no activity at the principal place of business of the assessee, it cannot be presumed that the invoices issued in favour of such assessee are fake. Petitioner approached the High Court seeking quashing of the penalty order under Section 129(3) of the CGST Act and seeking release of the goods confiscated under Section 129(1)(a) by the Assistant Commissioner Commercial Tax Mobile Unit Khataul, Muzaffarnagar. Petitioner...

Allahabad High Court Rejects Patanjali's Plea Against ₹273.5 Crore GST Penalty

The Allahabad High Court has directed continuation of proceedings under Section 122 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 against M/s Patanjali Ayurved limited's 3 plants even though proceedings under Section 74 of the Act have been dropped against them.The bench of Justice Shekhar B. Saraf and Justice Vipin Chandra Dixit held “Under the present GST regime, persons who are not liable to pay tax under Sections 73/74 of the CGST Act may very well be liable for penalties as described in...

Court Must See If Company Is A Threat To Commercial World For Winding Up U/S 433(f) Of Companies Act: Allahabad High Court

The Allahabad High Court has held that for winding up of a company under Section 433(f) of the the Companies Act, the Court must opine that the company is a threat to the commercial world if it remains in existence.Rejecting the application for winding up of a company, Justice Pankaj Bhatia held “To appreciate a case for winding up of a company on the ground that it is just and equitable, it is essential for the Court to form a view that in view of the status of the company, if the company is...

Once Goods Are Verified And Found To Be Correct In MOV-04, Department Can't Be Permitted To Change Stand Later: Allahabad High Court

The Allahabad High Court has held that when the authority on verification has mentioned the details of the goods found and verified the correctness of the invoices and the goods in transit, it cannot be permitted to change the stand later and say that the goods were not in accordance with the invoice. Justice Piyush Agrawal held “Once on the verification report i.e. MOV-04, the items are fed by the officer concerned, after due verification, the authorities cannot be permitted to...

Order U/S 75(6) Of GST Act Must Be Self-Contained, Mere References To SCNs Is Not Sufficient: Allahabad High Court

The Allahabad High Court has held that order under Section 75(6) of the Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 must be self-contained and mere reference to previous show cause notices is not sufficient. Section 75 of the GST Act is a general provision relating to determination of tax. Section 75(6) of the GST Act provides that “the proper officer, in his order, shall set out the relevant facts and the basis of his decision.” Petitioner argued that notice under Section 61 (Scrutiny of...

Mandatory To Fill Part B Of E-Way Bill In Transactions After April 2018: Allahabad High Court

Recently, the Allahabad High Court has held that it is mandatory for the assesee to download the complete E-way Bill including Part-B of the E-way Bill for transactions after April 2018. Distinguishing the earlier judgment of the High Court in M/s. Varun Beverages Limited vs. State of U.P. and 2 others, M/s. Falguni Steels vs. State of U.P. and others, and others, Justice Rohit Ranjan Agarwal held “Reliance placed upon the judgments is distinguishable in the facts of the present case...

Claims Of GST Department Are Barred Once Resolution Plan Is Approved: Allahabad High Court

Relying on the judgments of the Supreme Court in Vaibhav Goyal & Another Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax & Another, the Allahabad High Court has held that the claims of Goods and Service Tax Department are barred after the aproval of resolution plan by the National Company Law Tribunal. In Vaibhav Goyal & Another Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax & Another, the Apex Court has held that if the statutory dues owed to the Government do not form a part of the...

Burden Of Court Increasing Over Violations Of Natural Justice: Allahabad HC Imposes 20K Cost On GST Official For Not Following Mandatory Provision

The Allahabad High Court has imposed a cost of Rs. 20,000 on Joint Commissioner SGST, Corporate Circle-1, Ghaziabad who had issued a show cause notice without specifying the date and time for personal hearing and had passed an order under Section 74 of the Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 creating a demand of more than Rs. 5 crore ignoring the specific request for personal hearing made by the assesee.Section 75(4) of the GST Act provides that when requested in writing, the assesee must be given...

[Arbitration Act] No Automatic Stay On Award Upon Filing Of Appeal U/S 34 Within Time: Allahabad High Court Reiterates

Following the judgment of the Supreme Court in Board of Control for Cricket in India Vs. Kochi Cricket Pvt. Ltd. and others and Hindustan Construction Company Limited and others Vs. Union of India and others, the Allahabad High Court has reiterated that automatic stay on the operation of arbitral award is not granted merely by filing appeal under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 2016.Section 36 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 2016 introduced vide the amending act of...