TIMELINES

RECENT AMENDMENTS

ITAT JUDGEMENTS

The Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Mumbai vs. Shri Sameer Sudhakar Dighe dt. 13.04.2018 [MUMBAI BENCH]
The proceeds from a benefit match of around Rs. 50 lakh cannot be taxed in the hands of the cricketer. Read More

Madhu Sarda vs. Income Tax Officer, Mumbai dt. 09.03.2018 [MUMBAI BENCH]
Merely because the assessee has claimed set off of loss on account of long-term capital loss suffered on sale of shares to his/her son, against the capital gain earned on sale of immovable asset cannot be treated as a sham transaction. Read More

Shri Bathisha Kalam Pasha & Ors. vs. Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax dt. 22.03.2018 [COCHIN BENCH]
ITAT confirms Assessment against District Judges as there is No Provision in IT Rules Exempting Medical, Conveyance and Sumptuary Allowances. Read More

M/s Rajasthan Rajya Vidyut Utpadan Nigam Ltd., Jaipur Vs ACIT, Jaipur dt. 28.03.2018 [JAIPUR BENCH]
Counsel: Shri P.C.Parwal (CA)
Issue: Penalty imposed on the ground of breach of Section 44AB of Income Tax Act on failure to get their accounts audited and furnishing audit report before 30.09.2013.
Held: Where there has been a delay in completion of statutory audit, there exists a reasonable cause for the delay in completion and submission of the tax audit report under section 44AB of the Act. The penalty levied under section 271B is therefore deleted. Read More

FROM THE BENCH

GST

JCB India Ltd Vs Union Of India 20.03.2018 [BOMBAY HIGH COURT]
One Year Limitation for GST Transitional Credit Constitutionally Valid Read More

CENTRAL EXCISE

ACC Limited vs. Commissioner of Central excise, Pune dt. 28.03.2018 [BOMBAY HIGH COURT]
Welding electrodes are also the integral part of the ultimate manufacture of goods; hence the Assessee would be entitled to get CENVAT Credit Read More

INCOME TAX

Raghavan Nair vs. ACIT, Thrissur dt. 04.01.2018 [ KERALA HIGH COURT]
When assessee mistakenly paid taxes on exempt income, he cannot be penalised on technical ground such as non filing of revised return. Read More

SERVICE TAX

Firm Foundations & Housing Pvt. Ltd. vs. Principal Commissioner of Service Tax dt. 06.04.2018 [MADRAS HIGH COURT]
Profit and Loss Accounts cannot be relied upon for determination of the point of rendition and accrual of services for the purpose of imposition of Service Tax. Read More

MISCELLANEOUS

 

• Clarification by PIB regarding GST on supply of food and drinks in educational institutions. Read More
• Twitter guide on E-Way bill by GST@GoI:
  What is E-Way Bill?
  Why is it required?
  E-Way bill registration
  Who all can generate E-Way bill?
  Validity of E-Way bill.
  
• CBDT invites comments on draft notification proposing amendment to Rule 44E, Form 34C, 34D and 34DA as per BEPS Action 5, for improving transparency in tax rulings Read More
• Requirement for obtaining PAN card u/s 139A of IT Act, 1961 eased for corporate assessees Read More
• Press Release by CBEC regarding clarification on the manner of filing the quarterly return by composition dealers in FORM GSTR-4 Read More

The CGST Act empowers the proper officer to summon any person or give evidence or to submit any document in relation with any inquiry being conducted by him. The provisions are specified under Section 70 of the Act. A summons is basically a legal document issued by either a court or a quasi-judicial authority requiring the presence of a person or requiring production of certain documents material to the case in hand. Section 70 of the CGST Act, 2017 specifies that the summons so issued will be in the manner as provided in a civil court under the provisions of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.
The provisions relating to summons are provided under Section 27, 28 and 29 and Order V of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. It specifies as to what procedure is to be followed when the defendant on whom the summons are to be served resides in other state, or when the language in which the summons are issued to another state is different from the language of the record. Order V of CPC prescribes that when summons are issued to the person, he shall appear before the authority on the date specified in the summons. Rule 2(2) of Order V specifies that a defendant may either appear himself or even through a pleader, but the court or the authority if required can require the person to appear in person. The provisions also specify as to how the summons will be served to the person. Service can even be done on an agent or even an adult family member. The person receiving the summons shall also sign the acknowledgment. It also prescribes the procedure to be followed if the person on whom the summons is served tries to avoid it by refusing to accept the same or cannot be found, etc.
To be continued...