Chartered Accountant
Bookmark and Share
click here to subscribe our newsletter
 
 
Corporate News *  Missing seized records must be considered while testing ITC claim; duplicate GST demands ordered corrected: Delhi High Court. *  GST appeal can’t be rejected without addressing taxpayer’s grounds: Allahabad High Court. *  Surplus IGST credit can offset CGST, SGST shortfall: GSTAT. *  GST refund can’t be denied when cancelled airfares are returned with tax: GSTAT. *  3 Hearing notices issued within 2 minutes: Gujarat High Court flags portal flaw, seeks report. *  GSTR-9, GSTR-9C filing for FY 2025-26 enabled; pending GSTR-1 and GSTR-3B must be filed first. *  Dupattas are exempt fabrics, can’t be taxed as fibres at 4%: Madras High Court. *  Full transitional credit allowed on capital goods received after GST rollout: GSTAT denies Rs. 6.99 lakh export duty credit. *  GST return mismatch alone can’t justify fraud proceedings: GSTAT orders fresh adjudication under section 73. *  Supplier found non-existent later can’t alone justify input tax credit denial: GSTAT. *  GST interest stops once tax reaches government account, can’t run until return filing: GSTAT. *  Cancelled flat booking- GST refund can’t be denied without excluding COVID period from limitation: GSTAT. *  India notifies rules of origin for India–New Zealand FTA. *  Incomplete E-bike kits classifiable as complete vehicles, but not eligible for CKD duty concession: CESTAT. *  Same GST rate on main input and output can’t by itself bar inverted duty refund: GSTAT. *  Unjust enrichment doesn’t apply to customs refunds from assessments finalised before July 13, 2006: Gujarat High Court. *  CENVAT credit can’t be denied solely because plant And machinery are embedded in earth: Karnataka High Court. *  DFIA exports ineligible for RoDTEP benefits; customs directs repayment with applicable interest. *  Second E-Way bill alone doesn’t prove another supply: GSTAT. *  Bail denied in Rs. 1.19 crore fake GST refund case over risk of accused absconding again: Punjab and Haryana High Court. *  GST registration can be restored after revocation deadline if outstanding dues are paid: Gauhati High Court. *  Multiple GST proceedings over same suppliers: Calcutta High Court directs dept. to share findings for adjudication. *  E-Governance portal services not OIDAR, fixed deposit interest not taxable: CESTAT. *  Rs. 500 Stamp duty required on authority letters for CAs, CMA and GST practitioners in Pune GST division.  *  Rs. 1.10 crore GST refund must be paid in cash after business closure: Allahabad High Court. *  Godown rent attracts 18% GST even when used exclusively for exempt agricultural warehousing: AAR. *  GST portal launches "Multi-State Registration" facility: one master TRN for registration applications across multiple States/UTs. *  RoDTEP scheme extended till 31st December, 2026.  *  Mere disagreement with order can’t override Rs. 20 lakh appeal limit: GSTAT. *  Customs interest can’t be backdated before confiscation liability is determined; nearly 8 year period excluded: Delhi High Court.
Subject News *  GST summons: anticipatory bail maintainable without arrest order, but relief denied in evasion case: Allahabad High Court. *  GST Appeal can’t be decided without hearing taxpayer’s objections to fresh evidence: Allahabad High Court. *  GST ITC can’t be reversed merely because supplier grants discount without reducing tax liability: GSTAT. *  Mere quoting of GST provision is not a valid charge: GSTAT quashes ITC denial. *  Personal hearing mandatory before adverse GST order, even without taxpayer’s request: Rajasthan High Court. *  Parallel bail pleas without full disclosure amount to abuse of process Rs. 43.08 crore GST case sent for fresh hearing: Supreme Court. *  GST refund based on unchallenged advance ruling can’t be recovered using later circular: GSTAT. *  Payment of GST alone doesn’t end interest and penalty liability when tax and interest remain unpaid beyond 30 days of notice: GSTAT. *  GST demand over builders’ 80% procurement rule requires reasoned adjudication: GSTAT. *  Eligible ITC doesn’t automatically entitle taxpayers to compensation cess refund on domestic sales: GSTAT. *  GST confiscation order passed before reply deadline invalid: GSTAT. *  GST interest can’t be retained after tax refund on delayed export receipts: Punjab & Haryana High Court. *  GST appeal can’t be dismissed over pre-deposit shortfall without opportunity To respond: Bombay High Court. *  DGGI SCN can’t be challenged before reply and adjudication:Chhattisgarh High Court. *  GST input tax credit can’t be denied solely due to supplier’s retrospective registration cancellation: GSTAT. *  GST notice must explain fraud allegations; merely repeating section 74 Is not enough:  Himachal Pradesh High Court. *  Audit detection alone can’t justify GST fraud penalty; specific suppression must be proved: GSTAT. *  GST order uploaded only under ‘Additional Notices’ tab without separate intimation set aside: Calcutta High Court. *  Service Tax appeal can’t be rejected for missing pre-deposit proof when payment is already recorded: CESTAT. *  SGST dept. can’t hear appeal against CGST order: Calcutta High Court. *  Mere dispatch of tax order can’t prove service or make appeal time-barred: CESTAT. *  Dealer incentives can’t be taxed merely on ledger entries: CESTAT. *  DGFT orders quashed for failure to supply DRI letter relied upon in SCN: Bombay High Court. *  GST penalty u/s 122(1A) can’t apply to Pre-2021 transactions; unregistered beneficiaries also covered: Delhi High Court. *  Expired E-way bill caused by wrong PIN code can’t justify GST penalty without intent to evade tax: GSTAT. *  Used railway rails can’t be taxed as track material without proof they are fit for reuse: CESTAT. *  Earlier DGGI notice doesn’t bar separate GST demand on different issue: Delhi High Court. *  ITC dispute involves no question of law: GSTAT directs appeal to Vice-President. *  Earlier DGGI notice doesn’t bar separate GST demand On different issue: Delhi High Court. *  No E-way bill required for interstate goods movement in november 2017: GSTAT quashes detention and penalty.  

Comments

Print   |    |  Comment

PJ/Case Laws/2012-13/1405

‘Slack Adjuster Assembly’ not entitled for DEPB benefit.

Case:-M/s HALDEX INDIA LTD Vs COMMR OF CUSTOMS (EXPORT) NHAVA SHEVA
 
Citation:-2013-TIOL-102-CESTAT-MUM

Brief facts:-The applicant manufactured and exported the goods describing as ‘Roller for Auto Brake Shoe” and availed DEPB benefit on the said product. The case of the Revenue is that the applicant wrongly described the goods as Roller for Auto Brake Shoe' whereas in fact the goods were ‘Slack Adjuster Assembly'. Slack Adjuster Assembly is not entitled for DEPB benefit. Hence by mis-declaring the goods as Roller for Auto Brake Shoe, the applicant availed undue DEPB benefit.
 
Appellant’s contention:-The applicant contented that in the Shipping Bill filed by the applicant the description is given as Roller For Auto Brake Shoe (Slack Adjuster Assembly) and the goods have been exported. Previously, a query was raised regarding eligibility of such benefit in respect of the same goods and the matter was examined and ultimately it has been decided that the goods are eligible for DEPB benefit. Thereafter, now the Revenue wants to deny the benefit in respect of the same goods. The contention is that as the applicant is not the importer and therefore, the demand of customs duty under Sec. 28 of the Customs Act cannot be made. The demand of customs duty can be made from the importer.
 
Respondent’s contention:-Respondent relied upon the findings of the lower authority to submit that as the applicant were clearing the goods to DTA market as Slack Adjuster Assembly and therefore the applicant has misdeclared the goods in the Shipping bill as “Roller for Auto Brake Shoe” just to avail undue DEPB benefit. Hence the demand is rightly made. It is also submitted that the DEPB script issued by DGFT is now cancelled by DGFT as Slack Adjuster Assembly is not entitled for DEPB benefit. Hence the applicant has misdeclared the goods to avail undue DEPB benefit. The applicant is liable to pay duty in respect of the goods which were imported on the basis of such DEPB script.
 
Reasoning of judgment:-It was held that in the Shipping Bill, the applicant declared the goods as Roller For Auto Brake Shoe (Slack Adjuster Assembly). In respect of the earlier export, the matter was examined by the Customs authorities and it was decided that the applicant are entitled for DEPB benefit in respect of the same goods. Now the Revenue wants to deny the benefit on the ground that Roller for Auto Brake Shoe are different from Slack Adjuster Assembly. In these circumstances, as the applicant declared Slack Adjuster Assembly also in the Shipping Bill, prima facie, there is merit in the contention that the allegation of mis-declaration or suppression of fact is not sustainable. Hence pre-deposit of dues is waived and recovery thereof is stayed during the pendency of the appeal.
 
Decision:-Stay petition is allowed.
 
Comment:-It was alleged in this case that the description of goods was made as Roller for Auto Brake Shoe instead of Slack Adjuster Assembly purposely in order to claim DEPB benefit by mis-declaring the goods in question. But, as description of Slack Adjuster Assembly was also done in the Shipping Bill, it cannot be considered as suppression on part of the assessee.

Department News


Query

 
PRADEEP JAIN, F.C.A.

Head Office : -

Address :
"SUGYAN", H - 29, SHASTRI NAGAR, JODHPUR (RAJ.) - 342003

Phone No. :
0291 - 2439496, 0291 - 3258496

Mobile No. :
09314722236

Fax No. :0291 - 2439496


Branch Office : -

Address:
1008, 10th FLOOR, SUKH SAGAR COMPLEX,
NEAR FORTUNE LANDMARK HOTEL, USMANPURA,
ASHRAM ROAD, AHMEDABAD-380013

Phone No. :
079-32999496, 27560043

Mobile No. :
093777659496, 09377649496

E-mail :pradeep@capradeepjain.com