Consolidated show-cause notices valid if fraudulent input tax credit proven; appeal and DRC-07 summary allowed until 31 Oct 2025

Consolidated show-cause notices valid if fraudulent input tax credit proven; appeal and DRC-07 summary allowed until 31 Oct 2025Case-LawsGSTThe HC held that consolidated show-cause notices and orders may be valid where fraudulent availment or utilization

Consolidated show-cause notices valid if fraudulent input tax credit proven; appeal and DRC-07 summary allowed until 31 Oct 2025
Case-Laws
GST
The HC held that consolidated show-cause notices and orders may be valid where fraudulent availment or utilization of input tax credit is established; the Petitioner's challenge on the ground of issuance across multiple financial years is untenable in light of that precedent. The Petitioner was directed to exhaust statutory appellate remedy and is permitted to file an appeal and the summary in DRC-07 before the Appellate Authority by 31 October 2025, together with the requisite pre-deposit; if so filed by that date the appeal shall not be dismissed as time-barred and shall be adjudicated on merits. The writ petition is disposed.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =

Consolidated show-cause notices valid if fraudulent input tax credit proven; appeal and DRC-07 summary allowed until 31 Oct 2025

Consolidated show-cause notices valid if fraudulent input tax credit proven; appeal and DRC-07 summary allowed until 31 Oct 2025Case-LawsGSTThe HC held that consolidated show-cause notices and orders may be valid where fraudulent availment or utilization

Consolidated show-cause notices valid if fraudulent input tax credit proven; appeal and DRC-07 summary allowed until 31 Oct 2025
Case-Laws
GST
The HC held that consolidated show-cause notices and orders may be valid where fraudulent availment or utilization of input tax credit is established; the Petitioner's challenge on the ground of issuance across multiple financial years is untenable in light of that precedent. The Petitioner was directed to exhaust statutory appellate remedy and is permitted to file an appeal and the summary in DRC-07 before the Appellate Authority by 31 October 2025, together with the requisite pre-deposit; if so filed by that date the appeal shall not be dismissed as time-barred and shall be adjudicated on merits. The writ petition is disposed.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =

Consolidated show-cause notices valid if fraudulent input tax credit proven; appeal and DRC-07 summary allowed until 31 Oct 2025

Consolidated show-cause notices valid if fraudulent input tax credit proven; appeal and DRC-07 summary allowed until 31 Oct 2025Case-LawsGSTThe HC held that consolidated show-cause notices and orders may be valid where fraudulent availment or utilization

Consolidated show-cause notices valid if fraudulent input tax credit proven; appeal and DRC-07 summary allowed until 31 Oct 2025
Case-Laws
GST
The HC held that consolidated show-cause notices and orders may be valid where fraudulent availment or utilization of input tax credit is established; the Petitioner's challenge on the ground of issuance across multiple financial years is untenable in light of that precedent. The Petitioner was directed to exhaust statutory appellate remedy and is permitted to file an appeal and the summary in DRC-07 before the Appellate Authority by 31 October 2025, together with the requisite pre-deposit; if so filed by that date the appeal shall not be dismissed as time-barred and shall be adjudicated on merits. The writ petition is disposed.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =

Consolidated show-cause notices valid if fraudulent input tax credit proven; appeal and DRC-07 summary allowed until 31 Oct 2025

Consolidated show-cause notices valid if fraudulent input tax credit proven; appeal and DRC-07 summary allowed until 31 Oct 2025Case-LawsGSTThe HC held that consolidated show-cause notices and orders may be valid where fraudulent availment or utilization

Consolidated show-cause notices valid if fraudulent input tax credit proven; appeal and DRC-07 summary allowed until 31 Oct 2025
Case-Laws
GST
The HC held that consolidated show-cause notices and orders may be valid where fraudulent availment or utilization of input tax credit is established; the Petitioner's challenge on the ground of issuance across multiple financial years is untenable in light of that precedent. The Petitioner was directed to exhaust statutory appellate remedy and is permitted to file an appeal and the summary in DRC-07 before the Appellate Authority by 31 October 2025, together with the requisite pre-deposit; if so filed by that date the appeal shall not be dismissed as time-barred and shall be adjudicated on merits. The writ petition is disposed.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =

Consolidated show-cause notices valid if fraudulent input tax credit proven; appeal and DRC-07 summary allowed until 31 Oct 2025

Consolidated show-cause notices valid if fraudulent input tax credit proven; appeal and DRC-07 summary allowed until 31 Oct 2025Case-LawsGSTThe HC held that consolidated show-cause notices and orders may be valid where fraudulent availment or utilization

Consolidated show-cause notices valid if fraudulent input tax credit proven; appeal and DRC-07 summary allowed until 31 Oct 2025
Case-Laws
GST
The HC held that consolidated show-cause notices and orders may be valid where fraudulent availment or utilization of input tax credit is established; the Petitioner's challenge on the ground of issuance across multiple financial years is untenable in light of that precedent. The Petitioner was directed to exhaust statutory appellate remedy and is permitted to file an appeal and the summary in DRC-07 before the Appellate Authority by 31 October 2025, together with the requisite pre-deposit; if so filed by that date the appeal shall not be dismissed as time-barred and shall be adjudicated on merits. The writ petition is disposed.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =

Consolidated show-cause notices valid if fraudulent input tax credit proven; appeal and DRC-07 summary allowed until 31 Oct 2025

Consolidated show-cause notices valid if fraudulent input tax credit proven; appeal and DRC-07 summary allowed until 31 Oct 2025Case-LawsGSTThe HC held that consolidated show-cause notices and orders may be valid where fraudulent availment or utilization

Consolidated show-cause notices valid if fraudulent input tax credit proven; appeal and DRC-07 summary allowed until 31 Oct 2025
Case-Laws
GST
The HC held that consolidated show-cause notices and orders may be valid where fraudulent availment or utilization of input tax credit is established; the Petitioner's challenge on the ground of issuance across multiple financial years is untenable in light of that precedent. The Petitioner was directed to exhaust statutory appellate remedy and is permitted to file an appeal and the summary in DRC-07 before the Appellate Authority by 31 October 2025, together with the requisite pre-deposit; if so filed by that date the appeal shall not be dismissed as time-barred and shall be adjudicated on merits. The writ petition is disposed.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =

Consolidated show-cause notices valid if fraudulent input tax credit proven; appeal and DRC-07 summary allowed until 31 Oct 2025

Consolidated show-cause notices valid if fraudulent input tax credit proven; appeal and DRC-07 summary allowed until 31 Oct 2025Case-LawsGSTThe HC held that consolidated show-cause notices and orders may be valid where fraudulent availment or utilization

Consolidated show-cause notices valid if fraudulent input tax credit proven; appeal and DRC-07 summary allowed until 31 Oct 2025
Case-Laws
GST
The HC held that consolidated show-cause notices and orders may be valid where fraudulent availment or utilization of input tax credit is established; the Petitioner's challenge on the ground of issuance across multiple financial years is untenable in light of that precedent. The Petitioner was directed to exhaust statutory appellate remedy and is permitted to file an appeal and the summary in DRC-07 before the Appellate Authority by 31 October 2025, together with the requisite pre-deposit; if so filed by that date the appeal shall not be dismissed as time-barred and shall be adjudicated on merits. The writ petition is disposed.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =

Consolidated show-cause notices valid if fraudulent input tax credit proven; appeal and DRC-07 summary allowed until 31 Oct 2025

Consolidated show-cause notices valid if fraudulent input tax credit proven; appeal and DRC-07 summary allowed until 31 Oct 2025Case-LawsGSTThe HC held that consolidated show-cause notices and orders may be valid where fraudulent availment or utilization

Consolidated show-cause notices valid if fraudulent input tax credit proven; appeal and DRC-07 summary allowed until 31 Oct 2025
Case-Laws
GST
The HC held that consolidated show-cause notices and orders may be valid where fraudulent availment or utilization of input tax credit is established; the Petitioner's challenge on the ground of issuance across multiple financial years is untenable in light of that precedent. The Petitioner was directed to exhaust statutory appellate remedy and is permitted to file an appeal and the summary in DRC-07 before the Appellate Authority by 31 October 2025, together with the requisite pre-deposit; if so filed by that date the appeal shall not be dismissed as time-barred and shall be adjudicated on merits. The writ petition is disposed.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =

Consolidated show-cause notices valid if fraudulent input tax credit proven; appeal and DRC-07 summary allowed until 31 Oct 2025

Consolidated show-cause notices valid if fraudulent input tax credit proven; appeal and DRC-07 summary allowed until 31 Oct 2025Case-LawsGSTThe HC held that consolidated show-cause notices and orders may be valid where fraudulent availment or utilization

Consolidated show-cause notices valid if fraudulent input tax credit proven; appeal and DRC-07 summary allowed until 31 Oct 2025
Case-Laws
GST
The HC held that consolidated show-cause notices and orders may be valid where fraudulent availment or utilization of input tax credit is established; the Petitioner's challenge on the ground of issuance across multiple financial years is untenable in light of that precedent. The Petitioner was directed to exhaust statutory appellate remedy and is permitted to file an appeal and the summary in DRC-07 before the Appellate Authority by 31 October 2025, together with the requisite pre-deposit; if so filed by that date the appeal shall not be dismissed as time-barred and shall be adjudicated on merits. The writ petition is disposed.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =

Petition allowed; s.74 UPGST notice quashed where taxpayer proved actual goods movement, tax paid and no wilful suppression

Petition allowed; s.74 UPGST notice quashed where taxpayer proved actual goods movement, tax paid and no wilful suppressionCase-LawsGSTHC allowed the petition and quashed the impugned departmental orders. The court held that the SCN issued under s.74 UPGS

Petition allowed; s.74 UPGST notice quashed where taxpayer proved actual goods movement, tax paid and no wilful suppression
Case-Laws
GST
HC allowed the petition and quashed the impugned departmental orders. The court held that the SCN issued under s.74 UPGST Act was unjustified because the petitioner proved actual movement of goods and payment of tax, and the record contained no findings of fraud, wilful misstatement or suppression of facts aimed at tax evasion. Applying the principle that incorrect statements absent knowledge or intent do not constitute wilful suppression, the HC concluded that proceedings under s.74 could not be sustained. Consequently, the order dated 20.12.2022 of the Additional Commissioner and the order dated 12.01.2022 of the Deputy Commissioner were set aside and the petition was allowed.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =

IGST: Pre-packaged labelled rice (≤25kg) for export taxable at 5%; 0.1% concessional route available, including bill-to/ship-to and factory supplies

IGST: Pre-packaged labelled rice (≤25kg) for export taxable at 5%; 0.1% concessional route available, including bill-to/ship-to and factory suppliesCase-LawsGSTAAR held that the Applicant’s supply of pre-packaged and labelled rice (≤25 kg) for export

IGST: Pre-packaged labelled rice (≤25kg) for export taxable at 5%; 0.1% concessional route available, including bill-to/ship-to and factory supplies
Case-Laws
GST
AAR held that the Applicant's supply of pre-packaged and labelled rice (≤25 kg) for export is taxable under the IGST scheme at 5% if the Applicant opts for that route, provided the packages satisfy the notification's “pre-packaged & labelled” definition. Supplies to an exporter on a bill-to/ship-to basis and supplies to an exporter's factory are likewise taxable at 5%, but the concessional rate of 0.1% (0.05%+0.05%) under the relevant notifications is available for such supplies subject to their terms and conditions. The erstwhile restriction precluding IGST payment where concessional benefits were availed has been removed, so procuring at 0.1% does not bar exporting under IGST 5%.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =

GST circular: post-sale/secondary discounts, credit notes under Section 34 and when ITC reversal is not required

GST circular: post-sale/secondary discounts, credit notes under Section 34 and when ITC reversal is not requiredCircularsGSTCircular clarifies GST treatment of secondary/post-sale discounts: when suppliers issue financial/commercial credit notes that do n

GST circular: post-sale/secondary discounts, credit notes under Section 34 and when ITC reversal is not required
Circulars
GST
Circular clarifies GST treatment of secondary/post-sale discounts: when suppliers issue financial/commercial credit notes that do not reduce the original transaction value, recipients need not reverse input tax credit as the supplier's tax liability remains unchanged. Post-sale discounts from a manufacturer to a dealer are generally viewed as price reductions between independent sales (manufacturer→dealer; dealer→customer) and are not treated as consideration for inducement of the dealer's supply, unless the manufacturer has a direct agreement with the end customer-then such discounts should be included in overall consideration. Discounts are not consideration for promotional services unless a separate agreement specifies distinct services and consideration.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =

Remand for fresh adjudication under section 74 GST Act after non-speaking order rejected reply without addressing grounds

Remand for fresh adjudication under section 74 GST Act after non-speaking order rejected reply without addressing groundsCase-LawsGSTThe HC allowed the writ petition, holding the adjudication order to be a non-speaking order lacking application of mind; t

Remand for fresh adjudication under section 74 GST Act after non-speaking order rejected reply without addressing grounds
Case-Laws
GST
The HC allowed the writ petition, holding the adjudication order to be a non-speaking order lacking application of mind; the authority had merely rejected the petitioner's reply as “not satisfactory” without addressing the grounds raised. The petition was remitted for de novo adjudication of the show-cause notice under section 74 of the GST Act, with directions that the Assistant Commissioner of State Tax decide the matter on merits, independently and after appreciating the petitioner's contentions, and without being influenced by an earlier advance ruling rendered to a related proprietor which was not challenged. The petition stands allowed by way of remand.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =

Adjudication set aside and matter remanded for fresh adjudication after denial of effective opportunity to be heard

Adjudication set aside and matter remanded for fresh adjudication after denial of effective opportunity to be heardCase-LawsGSTThe HC set aside the impugned adjudication and remanded the matter to the concerned Adjudicating Authority for fresh adjudicatio

Adjudication set aside and matter remanded for fresh adjudication after denial of effective opportunity to be heard
Case-Laws
GST
The HC set aside the impugned adjudication and remanded the matter to the concerned Adjudicating Authority for fresh adjudication, observing a breach of natural justice. The court found that the show-cause notice was uploaded only to the portal's “Additional Notices” tab and the Petitioner had not availed any personal hearing or filed a reply, resulting in denial of an effective opportunity to be heard. In light of the portal's asymmetric visibility and the Department's concession regarding portal operation, the HC directed the authority to afford the Petitioner a proper opportunity of hearing and to decide the matter afresh in accordance with law. Petition disposed.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =

Retrospective GST registration cancellation set aside; cancellation can apply only from SCN date July 26, 2023

Retrospective GST registration cancellation set aside; cancellation can apply only from SCN date July 26, 2023Case-LawsGSTThe HC set aside the retrospective cancellation of the Petitioner’s GST registration backdated to 21 July 2017 and held the impugned

Retrospective GST registration cancellation set aside; cancellation can apply only from SCN date July 26, 2023
Case-Laws
GST
The HC set aside the retrospective cancellation of the Petitioner's GST registration backdated to 21 July 2017 and held the impugned rejection order invalid for lack of reasons. Noting the Petitioner had sought cancellation and that the SCN did not propose retrospective cancellation, the Court directed that cancellation, if sustained, shall operate only from the SCN date, 26 July 2023. The HC reaffirmed that authorities cannot impose retroactive cancellation absent explicit notice in the SCN. The GST authority remains free to initiate or continue any lawful proceedings for other violations against the Petitioner; the writ petition is disposed accordingly.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =

Extended limitation under s.74(1) read with s.74(10) of GST Act not available absent fraud, wilful misstatement or suppression

Extended limitation under s.74(1) read with s.74(10) of GST Act not available absent fraud, wilful misstatement or suppressionCase-LawsGSTHC held that the respondent lacked jurisdiction to invoke the extended limitation under s.74(1) read with s.74(10) of

Extended limitation under s.74(1) read with s.74(10) of GST Act not available absent fraud, wilful misstatement or suppression
Case-Laws
GST
HC held that the respondent lacked jurisdiction to invoke the extended limitation under s.74(1) read with s.74(10) of the GST Act in the absence of fraud, wilful misstatement or suppression by the petitioner. The court found the impugned show-cause notice failed to allege omission to declare information in returns or failure to furnish information when asked, rendering Explanation 2 inapplicable. The respondent's reliance on the petitioner's conduct, earlier litigation and withdrawal did not supply requisite material to assume extended jurisdiction. Consequently, the show-cause notice dated 05.08.2024 and the consequent Order-in-Original dated 04.02.2025 were quashed and set aside; petition allowed.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =

States should get compensation for GST revenue loss; eco growth should benefit all: Kerala FM

States should get compensation for GST revenue loss; eco growth should benefit all: Kerala FMGSTDated:- 14-9-2025PTINew Delhi, Sep 14 (PTI) Kerala Finance Minister KN Balagopal on Sunday said GST rate rationalisation benefits should be passed on to the co

States should get compensation for GST revenue loss; eco growth should benefit all: Kerala FM
GST
Dated:- 14-9-2025
PTI
New Delhi, Sep 14 (PTI) Kerala Finance Minister KN Balagopal on Sunday said GST rate rationalisation benefits should be passed on to the common people, but if there is no compensation for the annual revenue loss, then states will be unable to continue to meet their social responsibilities.
For Kerala, the annual revenue loss due to the GST rate rationalisation is estimated at Rs 8,000 crore to Rs 10,000 crore.
Asserting that economic growth should be beneficial for the entire country, Balagopal told PTI that progressive taxation should not mean less tax for all and high-income or high-end luxury goods should

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =

r the public finances in the future.
“GST rationalisation will result in huge discounts in taxes, and the prices should come down in the coming days. It should be passed on to the common consumers 'Aam Aadmi'… in the past, whenever rate rationalisation came (in 2017-18), the tax difference was not passed on to the people,” the senior leader of the ruling CPI(M)-led Left Front in Kerala said.
GST, sales tax and Value Added Tax (VAT) are among the main revenue income sources for a state, while the Centre has a lot more options, the minister said and highlighted that if the revenue loss is not compensated, then states cannot continue with their social responsibilities like health, education and public distribution system.
According to Ker

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =

GST reforms are huge victory for each, every citizen of country: Nirmala Sitharaman

GST reforms are huge victory for each, every citizen of country: Nirmala SitharamanGSTDated:- 14-9-2025PTIChennai, Sep 14 (PTI) Union Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman on Sunday said that the GST reforms are a huge victory for each and every citizen of

GST reforms are huge victory for each, every citizen of country: Nirmala Sitharaman
GST
Dated:- 14-9-2025
PTI
Chennai, Sep 14 (PTI) Union Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman on Sunday said that the GST reforms are a huge victory for each and every citizen of the country.
Taking into account that every state in India has their own festivals, it has been decided to implement the GST reforms much ahead of Prime Minister Narendra Modi's instruction of launching them before Deepavali fes

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =

NPPA asks drug makers, medical device industry to pass on GST rate cut benefit to consumers

NPPA asks drug makers, medical device industry to pass on GST rate cut benefit to consumersGSTDated:- 13-9-2025PTINew Delhi, Sep 13 (PTI) The National Pharmaceutical Pricing Authority has asked pharmaceutical companies and medical device makers to pass on

NPPA asks drug makers, medical device industry to pass on GST rate cut benefit to consumers
GST
Dated:- 13-9-2025
PTI
New Delhi, Sep 13 (PTI) The National Pharmaceutical Pricing Authority has asked pharmaceutical companies and medical device makers to pass on the benefit of reduced GST rates to consumers with effect from September 22.
“The benefit of reduction in GST rates shall be passed on to consumers/patients effective from September 22, 2025. All the manufacturers /marketing companies selling drugs/formulations shall revise the MRP of drugs/formulations (including medical devices) accordingly, with effect from September 22,” the authority said in an order.
The manufacturer and marketing companies shall issue a revised pr

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =

Omission of Rules 89(4B) & 96(10) CGST erases provisions ab initio; s.6 GCA and s.174(3) do not save pending matters

Omission of Rules 89(4B) & 96(10) CGST erases provisions ab initio; s.6 GCA and s.174(3) do not save pending mattersCase-LawsGSTThe HC held that the omission of Rule 89(4B) and Rule 96(10) of the CGST Rules by the 08.10.2024 notification operates to erase

Omission of Rules 89(4B) & 96(10) CGST erases provisions ab initio; s.6 GCA and s.174(3) do not save pending matters
Case-Laws
GST
The HC held that the omission of Rule 89(4B) and Rule 96(10) of the CGST Rules by the 08.10.2024 notification operates to erase those provisions ab initio for all matters other than “transactions past and closed”; Section 6 of the General Clauses Act does not apply to the omission effected by subordinate Rules and no savings clause was afforded, nor does s.174(3) or the notification's commencement clause save pending matters. Consequentially, undisposed show-cause notices, orders issued after 08.10.2024, and pre-08.10.2024 orders not finally determined (including matters pending on appeal or review) have lapsed. The impugned show-cause notices and original orders are set aside and the petitions are disposed.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =

Forensic analysis approved for seized CPU with strict protections; inspection on 11-12 Sept 2025, fees split equally

Forensic analysis approved for seized CPU with strict protections; inspection on 11-12 Sept 2025, fees split equallyCase-LawsGSTThe HC declined to adjudicate on the petitioner’s role in the underlying business and, without deciding merits, authorised fore

Forensic analysis approved for seized CPU with strict protections; inspection on 11-12 Sept 2025, fees split equally
Case-Laws
GST
The HC declined to adjudicate on the petitioner's role in the underlying business and, without deciding merits, authorised forensic analysis of the seized CPU subject to strict protective conditions to prevent access to third-party client data. The CPU, seized during a raid at a firm in which the petitioner's parents are partners, shall be inspected on 11 and 12 September 2025 from 11:00 onwards in the presence of designated persons and IT experts. The Court fixed a lump-sum fee of Rs.1,00,000 per HC IT official, to be borne equally by the petitioner and the revenue authority. Matter listed for further hearing on 30 October 2025.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =

Penalty under s.129 quashed where Form GST-MOV-01, invoice, e-way bill, and transport voucher showed no tax evasion intent

Penalty under s.129 quashed where Form GST-MOV-01, invoice, e-way bill, and transport voucher showed no tax evasion intentCase-LawsGSTThe HC allowed the appeal and writ petition, holding that penalty under s.129 could not be imposed. The court found the a

Penalty under s.129 quashed where Form GST-MOV-01, invoice, e-way bill, and transport voucher showed no tax evasion intent
Case-Laws
GST
The HC allowed the appeal and writ petition, holding that penalty under s.129 could not be imposed. The court found the appellant had produced requisite documentation (Form GST-MOV-01), an invoice from the job-worker, an e-way bill for stock transfer, and a stock transfer voucher corroborated by the transporter's document, demonstrating absence of mens rea to evade tax. The HC set aside the orders of the adjudicating and appellate authorities, deleted the penalty, and directed release/cancellation of the bank guarantee furnished in favour of the department. Given the factual matrix and documentary proof of lawful stock transfer from the job-worker to the appellant, no penal liability survived.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =

Delay condoned; assessment and appeal rejection set aside; petitioner allowed to prosecute appeal after 5% additional deposit within two weeks

Delay condoned; assessment and appeal rejection set aside; petitioner allowed to prosecute appeal after 5% additional deposit within two weeksCase-LawsGSTThe HC exercised its discretionary jurisdiction to condone delay in filing the appeal, finding the pe

Delay condoned; assessment and appeal rejection set aside; petitioner allowed to prosecute appeal after 5% additional deposit within two weeks
Case-Laws
GST
The HC exercised its discretionary jurisdiction to condone delay in filing the appeal, finding the petitioner's reasons for delay bona fide, and thus set aside both the impugned assessment order issued by the first respondent and the rejection of the appeal by the second respondent. The Court granted the petitioner one opportunity to prosecute the appeal before the Appellate Authority subject to conditions: the petitioner must remit an additional 5% of the disputed tax in supplement to the 10% pre-deposit already paid at the time of filing, and such further deposit must be made within two weeks of receipt of this order. The writ petition is disposed of accordingly.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =

Petitioner liable for late fee under Section 47(2) for failure to file GSTR-9; petition dismissed

Petitioner liable for late fee under Section 47(2) for failure to file GSTR-9; petition dismissedCase-LawsGSTHC dismissed the writ petition and upheld the impugned order, holding the petitioner liable for late fees under Section 47(2) of the TN GST Act fo

Petitioner liable for late fee under Section 47(2) for failure to file GSTR-9; petition dismissed
Case-Laws
GST
HC dismissed the writ petition and upheld the impugned order, holding the petitioner liable for late fees under Section 47(2) of the TN GST Act for failure to furnish the annual return (GSTR-9) for AY 2021-22 in violation of Section 44 read with Rule 80. The court found no merit in the challenge, noting the petitioner did not file the return within three years; issuance of a notice under Rule 68/GSTR-3A did not obviate liability. The petitioner remains liable to pay late fee calculated at Rs.100 per day subject to the statutory ceiling of one quarter percent of turnover, and the petition is dismissed.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =

Belated s.161 rectification dismissed as time-barred; sent back for fresh adjudication on Serial No.20 exemption, 25% provisional payment

Belated s.161 rectification dismissed as time-barred; sent back for fresh adjudication on Serial No.20 exemption, 25% provisional paymentCase-LawsGSTThe HC dismissed the belated application for rectification under s.161 as time-barred but observed that, p

Belated s.161 rectification dismissed as time-barred; sent back for fresh adjudication on Serial No.20 exemption, 25% provisional payment
Case-Laws
GST
The HC dismissed the belated application for rectification under s.161 as time-barred but observed that, prima facie, the petitioner may fall within the exemption under Serial No.20 of N.N. 2/2017-CT (Rate); however, the factual question whether the petitioner dealt in goods covered by that entry was held to be inappropriate for determination by the HC. The court quashed the impugned order and remitted the matter to the original authority for fresh adjudication, directing adjudication on terms and specifying provisional compliance by the petitioner of 25% of the disputed tax. The petition was disposed of by remand.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =