PSN AUTOMOBILES PRIVATE LIMITED Versus THE UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, NEW DELHI AND THE CENTRAL BOARD OF INDIRECT TAXES AND CUSTOMS, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, MINISTRY OF FINANCE, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, NEW DELHI
GST
2019 (1) TMI 1022 – KERALA HIGH COURT – 2020 (39) G. S. T. L. 140 (Ker.)
KERALA HIGH COURT – HC
Dated:- 17-1-2019
WP(C) No. 680\/2019
GST
MR DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU, J.
\nFor The Petitioner : CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER, MR. MATHEW GEORGE
\nORDER
\nSection 15 of the Goods and Services Tax Act speaks of the value of goods and services, besides defining how the value of supply shall be reckoned. It says that the value of supply of goods, services, or both shall be the <\/p>\n
= = = = = = = =<\/p>\n
Plain text (Extract) only<\/strong> = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n ed by the petitioner. According to him, the petitioner, as the dealer of the motor vehicle, acts only as an agent for the State to collect the income tax under Section 206C(1F). And that amount will eventually goes to the vehicle purchaser's credit. = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n Plain text (Extract) only<\/strong> = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" PSN AUTOMOBILES PRIVATE LIMITED Versus THE UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, NEW DELHI AND THE CENTRAL BOARD OF INDIRECT TAXES AND CUSTOMS, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, MINISTRY OF FINANCE, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, NEW DELHIGST2019 (1) TMI 1022 – KERALA HIGH COURT – 2020 (39) G. S. T. L. 140 … Continue reading “PSN AUTOMOBILES PRIVATE LIMITED Versus THE UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, NEW DELHI AND THE CENTRAL BOARD OF INDIRECT TAXES AND CUSTOMS, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, MINISTRY OF FINANCE, GOVERNMENT O”<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-16256","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/16256","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=16256"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/16256\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=16256"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=16256"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=16256"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}
For full text:-Visit the Source <\/a><\/p>\n
\n4. In this context, the learned Senior Counsel has drawn my attention to the last portion of Section 15(2)(a), which emphasises “charging of tax, duties, cess or fee by the supplier”. Indeed, recently a constitution Bench of the
\n5. Hon'ble Supreme Court in Commissioner of Customs (Import), Mumbai u M\/S. Dilip Kumar & Co. Judgment dated 30.07.2018 in Civil Appeal No. 3327\/2007 has held that any ambiguity in taxing provision should be resolved in the State's fare. Yet, in this context, t<\/p>\n
For full text:-Visit the Source <\/a><\/p>\n