@abhishekrajaram's Latest X Threads

𝗖𝗮𝘀𝗲 𝗟𝗮𝘄 𝗦𝘂𝗺𝗺𝗮𝗿𝘆: 𝗦𝘂𝗱𝗵𝗮𝗸𝗮𝗿 𝗧𝗿𝗮𝗱𝗲𝗿𝘀 𝘃𝘀 𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗦𝘁𝗮𝘁𝗲 𝗼𝗳 𝗔𝗻𝗱𝗵𝗿𝗮 𝗣𝗿𝗮𝗱𝗲𝘀𝗵

📰 𝗖𝗘𝗦𝗧𝗔𝗧 𝗗𝗲𝗹𝗵𝗶 𝗗𝗲𝗰𝗶𝘀𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗼𝗻 𝗘𝘅𝘁𝗲𝗻𝗱𝗲𝗱 𝗟𝗶𝗺𝗶𝘁𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗣𝗲𝗿𝗶𝗼𝗱: 𝗣𝗿𝗶𝗼𝗿 𝗗𝗲𝗽𝗮𝗿𝘁𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁𝗮𝗹 𝗔𝘂𝗱𝗶𝘁𝘀 𝗣𝗿𝗲𝘃𝗲𝗻𝘁 𝗟𝗮𝘁𝗲𝗿 𝗜𝗻𝘃𝗼𝗰𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗼𝗳 𝗘𝘅𝘁𝗲𝗻𝗱𝗲𝗱 𝗣𝗲𝗿𝗶𝗼𝗱 𝗮𝗳𝘁𝗲𝗿 𝗦𝗲𝗮𝗿𝗰𝗵

📰 𝗔𝗻𝗱𝗵𝗿𝗮 𝗣𝗿𝗮𝗱𝗲𝘀𝗵 𝗛𝗶𝗴𝗵 𝗖𝗼𝘂𝗿𝘁 𝗥𝘂𝗹𝗶𝗻𝗴: 𝗜𝗻𝘃𝗮𝗹𝗶𝗱 𝗦𝗵𝗼𝘄 𝗖𝗮𝘂𝘀𝗲 𝗡𝗼𝘁𝗶𝗰𝗲 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝗚𝗦𝗧 𝗥𝗲𝗴𝗶𝘀𝘁𝗿𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗖𝗮𝗻𝗰𝗲𝗹𝗹𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗟𝗮𝗰𝗸𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗜𝘀𝘀𝘂𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗔𝘂𝘁𝗵𝗼𝗿𝗶𝘁𝘆 𝗗𝗲𝘁𝗮𝗶𝗹𝘀

📰 𝗣𝗮𝘁𝗻𝗮 𝗛𝗶𝗴𝗵 𝗖𝗼𝘂𝗿𝘁 𝗥𝘂𝗹𝗶𝗻𝗴: 𝗗𝗥𝗖-𝟬𝟳 𝗢𝗿𝗱𝗲𝗿𝘀 𝗥𝗲𝗾𝘂𝗶𝗿𝗲 𝟯𝟬-𝗗𝗮𝘆 𝗦𝘁𝗮𝘁𝘂𝘁𝗼𝗿𝘆 𝗣𝗲𝗿𝗶𝗼𝗱 𝗨𝗻𝗱𝗲𝗿 𝗚𝗦𝗧 𝗟𝗮𝘄

𝗖𝗘𝗦𝗧𝗔𝗧 𝗖𝗵𝗮𝗻𝗱𝗶𝗴𝗮𝗿𝗵 𝗥𝘂𝗹𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗼𝗻 𝗥𝗲𝗳𝘂𝗻𝗱 𝗼𝗳 𝗦𝗲𝗿𝘃𝗶𝗰𝗲 𝗧𝗮𝘅 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝗘𝘅𝗽𝗼𝗿𝘁-𝗥𝗲𝗹𝗮𝘁𝗲𝗱 𝗦𝗲𝗿𝘃𝗶𝗰𝗲𝘀 📢 The Tribunal held: "Custom House Agents acting as pure agents may use debit notes as invoices, permitting refunds on service tax paid for CHA services, export commission, and transportation costs."

𝗖𝗘𝗦𝗧𝗔𝗧 𝗖𝗵𝗲𝗻𝗻𝗮𝗶 𝗥𝘂𝗹𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗼𝗻 𝗥𝗲𝗳𝘂𝗻𝗱 𝗼𝗳 𝗦𝗲𝗿𝘃𝗶𝗰𝗲 𝗧𝗮𝘅 𝗼𝗻 𝗥𝗲𝘀𝗶𝗱𝗲𝗻𝘁𝗶𝗮𝗹 𝗖𝗼𝗺𝗽𝗹𝗲𝘅𝗲𝘀 📢 The Tribunal held: "Since the appellant bore the tax incidence for a flat intended for personal use, refund denial was unfounded. The appellant is entitled to the refund."

𝗖𝗘𝗦𝗧𝗔𝗧 𝗖𝗵𝗲𝗻𝗻𝗮𝗶 𝗥𝘂𝗹𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗼𝗻 𝗜𝗻𝘁𝗲𝗿𝗻𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝗮𝗹 𝗥𝗼𝗮𝗺𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗦𝗲𝗿𝘃𝗶𝗰𝗲𝘀 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗥𝗲𝘃𝗲𝗿𝘀𝗲 𝗖𝗵𝗮𝗿𝗴𝗲 𝗠𝗲𝗰𝗵𝗮𝗻𝗶𝘀𝗺 (𝗥𝗖𝗠) 📢 The Tribunal held: "Telecommunication services provided during international outbound roaming are not taxable under RCM, as the foreign telecom operator (FTO) is not a 'telegraph authority.'"

𝗖𝗘𝗦𝗧𝗔𝗧 𝗖𝗵𝗲𝗻𝗻𝗮𝗶 𝗥𝘂𝗹𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗼𝗻 𝗖𝗲𝗻𝘃𝗮𝘁 𝗖𝗿𝗲𝗱𝗶𝘁 𝗗𝗲𝗻𝗶𝗮𝗹 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗥𝗲𝗳𝘂𝗻𝗱 𝗖𝗹𝗮𝗶𝗺 𝗥𝗲𝘃𝗲𝗿𝘀𝗮𝗹 📢 The Tribunal held: "Cenvat credit cannot be denied solely because premises are unregistered, nor should credit be reversed again simply because cash refund was not sanctioned."

📰 𝗗𝗲𝗹𝗵𝗶 𝗛𝗶𝗴𝗵 𝗖𝗼𝘂𝗿𝘁 𝗥𝘂𝗹𝗶𝗻𝗴: 𝗚𝗦𝗧 𝗗𝗲𝗽𝗮𝗿𝘁𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁 𝗢𝗿𝗱𝗲𝗿𝗲𝗱 𝘁𝗼 𝗥𝗲𝗹𝗲𝗮𝘀𝗲 𝗜𝗧𝗖 𝗥𝗲𝗳𝘂𝗻𝗱 𝗔𝗳𝘁𝗲𝗿 𝗪𝗶𝗻𝗻𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗔𝗽𝗽𝗲𝗮𝗹

📰 𝗖𝗮𝗹𝗰𝘂𝘁𝘁𝗮 𝗛𝗶𝗴𝗵 𝗖𝗼𝘂𝗿𝘁 𝗥𝘂𝗹𝗶𝗻𝗴: 𝗡𝗼 𝗣𝗲𝗻𝗮𝗹𝘁𝘆 𝗼𝗻 𝗘𝘅𝗽𝗶𝗿𝗲𝗱 𝗲-𝗪𝗮𝘆 𝗕𝗶𝗹𝗹 𝗶𝗻 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗖𝗮𝘀𝗲 𝗼𝗳 𝗨𝘀𝗵𝗮 𝗠𝗮𝗿𝘁𝗶𝗻 𝗟𝘁𝗱. 📢 The court held, "Intentions matter more than actions, especially in cases of procedural lapses without tax evasion intent." 🔍 𝗙𝗮𝗰𝘁𝘀: • 𝗖𝗮𝘀𝗲 𝗧𝗶𝘁𝗹𝗲: Usha Martin Limited vs The Deputy Commissioner of State Tax, Durgapur Range • 𝗖𝗮𝘀𝗲 𝗡𝘂𝗺𝗯𝗲𝗿𝘀: MAT/1034/2023 and IA NO: CAN/1/2023, CAN/2/2023 • 𝗖𝗼𝘂𝗿𝘁: Calcutta High Court • 𝗗𝗮𝘁𝗲: 16-Jun-2023 𝗜𝘀𝘀𝘂𝗲: Usha Martin Ltd., a manufacturer and exporter, faced detention and a 100% tax penalty for transporting goods under an expired e-Way Bill. The goods were damaged during loading and returned to the factory for repairs, with a valid e-Way Bill indicating that no tax was due. However, the e-Way Bill expired in transit, leading the authorities to intercept the goods and impose a full tax and penalty. The appellant argued that this was an unintentional procedural lapse and appealed, ultimately challenging the levy in court when the expected GST Tribunal was not established.