Goods and Services Tax

Case-Laws – GST – Highlights – The High Court dismissed the writ petition challenging the notice issued u/s 65 of the Maharashtra Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 for conducting an audit for the financial year 2020-21, even though the petitioner had ceased to be registered on the date of ordering the audit. The Court held that the provisions of Section 65 dealing with audit would apply to a person who was registered under the CGST Act for the period for which an audit is ordered, irrespective of subsequent de-registration. The preliminary audit report had found excess input tax credit claimed, improper reversal of input tax credit, and short disclosure of other income, resulting in a total tax plus interest liability. The Court observed that a person cannot escape audit proceedings by claiming de-registration, as obligations u/s 65(5) must be complied with, and Section 29(3) requires discharge of obligations even after cancellation of registration. Obstructing audit proceedings by taking such a plea would be improper if the assessee has defaulted in tax payment, wrongly availed input tax credit or refund. – TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts Tax Management India – taxmanagementindia – taxmanagement – taxmanagementindia.com – TMI – TaxTMI – TMITax

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Case-Laws – GST – Highlights – The case pertains to the jurisdiction of impugned orders under the U.P.G.S.T. Act, 2017, and the time limitation u/s 73 and Section 44 of the Act. The key points are: the retrospective effect of notifications, the time limit prescribed for issuing orders u/s 73(9) based on the due date of filing annual returns u/s 44(1), and the validity of the impugned orders in light of this time limit. The due date for filing the annual return for the financial year 2017-18 was extended to 05.02.2020 via notifications. Consequently, the three-year time limit u/s 73(10) for issuing orders ended on 05.02.2023. However, the impugned orders were dated 05.10.2024 and 02.12.2023, beyond the prescribed time limit. Therefore, the High Court held that the impugned orders were beyond jurisdiction, being barred by the time limit u/s 73(10). Consequently, the writ petition was allowed, the impugned orders were quashed, and the petitioner's frozen accounts were ordered to be de-frozen. – TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts Tax Management India – taxmanagementindia – taxmanagement – taxmanagementindia.com – TMI – TaxTMI – TMITax

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Case-Laws – GST – Highlights – Inordinate, unexplained delay in issuing show cause notice and adjudication order violates principles of natural justice. The Court, citing precedents, quashed the show cause notice and restrained the Respondents from proceeding further with the inordinately delayed adjudication. The impugned order was set aside, preventing further steps or proceedings arising from it. The petition was allowed. – TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts Tax Management India – taxmanagementindia – taxmanagement – taxmanagementindia.com – TMI – TaxTMI – TMITax

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Case-Laws – GST – Highlights – The High Court granted interim relief to the petitioners challenging an order issued u/s 74 of the Central/West Bengal Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. Considering the prima facie case and the clarification issued by the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs, the petitioners were entitled to limited protection. The Court extended the time for responding to the show cause notice by three weeks and granted liberty to mention the matter after the exchange of affidavits. The respondents were also granted liberty to apply. – TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts Tax Management India – taxmanagementindia – taxmanagement – taxmanagementindia.com – TMI – TaxTMI – TMITax

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Case-Laws – GST – Highlights – The High Court rectified its previous order, holding that Notification No. 54/2018 Central Tax shall apply prospectively from 9th October 2018 only. Consequently, the show cause notice dated 31.03.2023, issued on the basis of retrospective operation of the said Notification for the period prior to 9.10.2018, was quashed as being without jurisdiction. The amount quantified towards alleged erroneous refund for the period before 9.10.2018 would not survive, as the Notification would be applicable prospectively. The petition was disposed of accordingly. – TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts Tax Management India – taxmanagementindia – taxmanagement – taxmanagementindia.com – TMI – TaxTMI – TMITax

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Case-Laws – GST – Highlights – Notification 53/2023 issued by the Ministry of Finance permitted filing delayed appeals beyond Section 107 of GST Act, stipulating payment of 12.5% of pending amounts, with 20% paid from Electronic Cash Ledger. This implied the 10% prescribed by statute could be paid from Electronic Credit Ledger. The High Court initially rejected the appeal on grounds of payment from Electronic Cash Ledger. However, as the Supreme Court stayed the Division Bench judgment, the High Court opined that pending Supreme Court's decision, the appeal should be considered on merits. Consequently, the order rejecting the appeal was set aside, and the petition was allowed. – TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts Tax Management India – taxmanagementindia – taxmanagement – taxmanagementindia.com – TMI – TaxTMI – TMITax

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Case-Laws – GST – Highlights – The applicant, acting as an aggregator for diagnostic and lab services provided through third-party diagnostic labs, is liable to collect GST on the entire invoice amount raised on companies/insurance companies/insurance brokers, not merely on the margin. The applicable tax rate is based on the services being diagnostic services covered under healthcare services, classified under SAC 9993. The applicant does not qualify as an e-commerce operator or a clinical establishment eligible for exemption. Therefore, the applicant must collect GST on the diagnostic and lab services provided to clients. The applicant also does not fall under the definition of an “Insurance Agent” when invoicing insurance companies, and must raise invoices as per other companies. The issue of collecting Tax Collected at Source (TCS) is redundant since the applicant is not an e-commerce operator. – TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts Tax Management India – taxmanagementindia – taxmanagement – taxmanagementindia.com – TMI – TaxTMI – TMITax

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Goods and Services Tax – GST Dated:- 19-11-2024 – News – Important advisory on GSTR 2B and IMS Dated:- 19-11-2024 – 1. It has been reported by few taxpayers that their GSTR-2B for October-2024 period has not been generated on 14th November, 2024. In this regard it to be informed that as per the design of IMS, GSTR-2B will not be generated by the system in below scenarios: i. In case the taxpayer has opted for QRMP scheme (Quarterly filers), GSTR-2B will not be generated for first and second month of the quarter. Ex. For quarter Oct-Dec, 2024, the quarterly taxpayer will get GSTR-2B for December-2024 period only and not for October-2024 November-2024. ii. In case the taxpayer has not filed their previous period GSTR-3B , GSTR-2B will not

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

d/521 3 Frequently Asked Questions on IMS Sep 22nd, 2024 https://services.gst.gov.in/services/advisoryandreleases/read/522 4 Attention – Advisory on IMS Oct 14th, 2024 https://services.gst.gov.in/services/advisoryandreleases/read/532 5 Additional FAQs on IMS Oct 17th, 2024 https://services.gst.gov.in/services/advisoryandreleases/read/536 6 Advisory regarding IMS during initial phase of its implementation Nov 12th, 2024 https://services.gst.gov.in/services/advisoryandreleases/read/547 7 Advisory on IMS on Supplier View Nov 13th, 2024 https://services.gst.gov.in/services/advisoryandreleases/read/548 Thanking You, Team GSTN – – News – Press release – PIB Tax Management India – taxmanagementindia – taxmanagement – taxmanagementindia.com – TMI

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Case-Laws – GST – Highlights – Challenge to assessment order and rectification order for assessment year 2018-19 – mismatch between GSTR-3B and GSTR-2A/GSTR-2B – order challenged on grounds of non-service through tendering or registered post, violating principles of natural justice – impugned order set aside – petitioner directed to deposit 25% of disputed tax as per rectification order within 4 weeks – on compliance, assessment order treated as show cause notice – petitioner to file objections with supporting documents within 4 weeks – writ petition disposed of. – TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts Tax Management India – taxmanagementindia – taxmanagement – taxmanagementindia.com – TMI – TaxTMI – TMITax

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Case-Laws – GST – Highlights – Petitioner challenged order u/s 73 of GST Act creating demand, as notices were uploaded on GST portal's 'Additional Notices and Orders' tab, unbeknownst to petitioner who couldn't appear or question orders within limitation period. Referring to OLA FLEET case, where impugned order wasn't reflected under 'View Notices and Orders' tab and assessee's replies weren't considered, High Court quashed impugned orders dated 27.12.2023 and 02.02.2023 passed by Assistant Commissioner. Petitioner allowed to treat impugned order as final notice and submit reply within two weeks, as disputed amount deposited with government and no outstanding demand exists. – TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts Tax Management India – taxmanagementindia – taxmanagement – taxmanagementindia.com – TMI – TaxTMI – TMITax

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Case-Laws – GST – Highlights – The High Court held that the final assessment order passed by the authority exceeded the scope of the show cause notice by determining a higher tax liability than alleged in the notice. This violated Section 75(7) of the Act, which mandates that the final order cannot travel beyond the allegations in the show cause notice. Consequently, the High Court set aside the impugned assessment order and directed the competent authority to re-hear the matter, consider all objections, and pass a fresh order in accordance with law. The writ petition was disposed of without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case. – TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts Tax Management India – taxmanagementindia – taxmanagement – taxmanagementindia.com – TMI – TaxTMI – TMITax

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Case-Laws – GST – Highlights – Extension of time limits for filing annual returns under GST Acts was valid. Show Cause Notice issued within extended time limit u/s 73(9) of CGST/AGST Act for FY 2017-18 was upheld. Writ petition was dismissed as statutory appeal remedy u/s 107 of CGST/AGST Act was available against the Order-in-Original passed by the Adjudicating Authority. Principles of alternative statutory remedy, absence of violation of natural justice, jurisdiction and legislative vires were reiterated for declining writ jurisdiction under Article 226. – TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts Tax Management India – taxmanagementindia – taxmanagement – taxmanagementindia.com – TMI – TaxTMI – TMITax

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Case-Laws – GST – Highlights – Entertainability of petition challenging show cause notice for recovery of taxes, determination of value of supply u/s 15(3)(b) of CGST Act. Allegations of suppressing facts, misstatement regarding non-furnishing outward supplies u/s 37, intention to evade GST from July 2017 to March 2022. Invocation of extended period of limitation based on suppression, misstatement with intent to evade GST. Adjudication on factual issues of suppression, misstatement, onus of proof u/s 15(3)(b) cannot be undertaken in writ jurisdiction. No challenge to circular in prayer. Petition dismissed, time granted till 15 December 2024 to file reply. Personal hearing, reasoned order by 31 January 2025 directed. – TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts Tax Management India – taxmanagementindia – taxmanagement – taxmanagementindia.com – TMI – TaxTMI – TMITax

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Case-Laws – GST – Highlights – Interest on delayed refund of tax u/s 56 of Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 is payable from expiry of 60 days from date of filing shipping bill till date of actual refund, irrespective of any interim period where assessee's name was red-flagged on department's portal. Section 56 provides for period of interest payment, commencing from date of receipt of refund application till refund grant. Shipping bill is considered refund application, hence interest accrues after 60 days from its filing. Denying interest by excluding contingent period of red-flagging would amount to rewriting Section 56, which is impermissible. Assessee is entitled to interest for entire period from 60 days after shipping bill till date of refund grant. – TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts Tax Management India – taxmanagementindia – taxmanagement – taxmanagementindia.com – TMI – TaxTMI – TMITax

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Case-Laws – GST – Highlights – Proviso to sub-rule (4) of Rule 22 of CGST Rules 2017 allows revocation of GST registration cancellation u/s 29(2)(c) of CGST Act 2017 if pending returns are filed and tax, interest and late fees paid. Petitioner's GST registration was cancelled for non-filing returns for 6 months. High Court set aside cancellation order, directing petitioner to approach authority within 1 month for revocation upon filing pending returns and paying dues, following precedents. Petition disposed accordingly. – TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts Tax Management India – taxmanagementindia – taxmanagement – taxmanagementindia.com – TMI – TaxTMI – TMITax

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Case-Laws – GST – Highlights – The court dismissed the petitioner's appeal due to non-compliance with statutory requirements, specifically the failure to submit valid proof of payment of the mandatory pre-deposit and the absence of valid documents establishing the petitioner's authority as an authorized signatory under the Companies Act. However, the court found that the respondent erred in not verifying the petitioner's authorization on the GSTN portal. Citing a precedent case, the court quashed the impugned order and remanded the matter to the respondent for fresh consideration, emphasizing the importance of adhering to due process and verifying relevant facts before rendering a decision. – TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts Tax Management India – taxmanagementindia – taxmanagement – taxmanagementindia.com – TMI – TaxTMI – TMITax

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Case-Laws – GST – Highlights – Challenge to penalty order u/s 129(1) of CGST Act for non-generation of Part-B of E-way bill. Petitioner accepted notice and paid Rs. 11,08,150 penalty voluntarily without objection. Respondent justified in passing penalty order for violating Section 129(1). However, petitioner had no intention of tax evasion, transporting goods from port after customs clearance. Part-A of e-way bill generated, only Part-B not accompanying goods when intercepted. Petitioner liable for penalty equivalent to 200% of tax payable, but since IGST already paid, subjected to 200% of tax paid. Contravention of Rule 138 technical as goods not accompanying Part-B. Penalty u/s 129(1)(a) modified to Rs. 25,000 instead of Rs. 11,08,150 to justify technical violation of not having Part-B. Impugned penalty order modified to Rs. 25,000. – TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts Tax Management India – taxmanagementindia – taxmanagement – taxmanagementindia.com – TMI – TaxTMI – TMITax

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Case-Laws – GST – Highlights – Amendment to Central Goods and Services Tax (CGST) Act, 2017 introduced sub-section (5) in Section 16 regarding input tax credit. Petitioner submitted invoice/debit note for financial year 2018-19 prior to November 30, 2021, falling under the purview of sub-section (5). High Court directed respondent authorities to consider the matter and pass appropriate order considering the provision of Sub-Section (5) of Section 16 of CGST Act, 2017, as amended by Finance Act, 2024 dated August 16, 2024. Appeal disposed of. – TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts Tax Management India – taxmanagementindia – taxmanagement – taxmanagementindia.com – TMI – TaxTMI – TMITax

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Case-Laws – GST – Highlights – Natural Antioxidant Water with natural Betel Leaf extract and natural Ajwain extract cannot be classified under HSN 2202 9920 as it does not contain any fruit juice or fruit pulp. The product is essentially 'Paan flavored water' with menthol crystals dissolved in propylene glycol as a flavoring additive. It is not classifiable under HSN 2201 1010 due to the exclusion clause of “nor flavoured” in the goods description. The product is rightly classifiable under HSN 2202 1090 as “All goods (including aerated waters), containing added sugar or other sweetening matter or flavoured”, taxable at 28% under Sl. No 12 to Schedule IV of the Notification No 1/2017, Central Tax (Rate) dated 28.06.2017, and compensation Cess at 12% under Sl. No 4 of Notification No 1/2017-Compensation Cess (Rate) dated 28.06.2017. – TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts Tax Management India – taxmanagementindia – taxmanagement – taxmanagementindia.com – TMI – TaxTMI – TMITax

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Case-Laws – GST – Highlights – The High Court set aside the order cancelling the petitioner's GST registration effective July 31, 2021, on grounds of violation of principles of natural justice. Despite issuance of show cause notices on August 26, 2022 and December 1, 2022, the petitioner's registration had already been cancelled by that time. The petitioner claimed non-receipt of notices, and the service issue remained unclear. However, the petitioner's registration cancellation was reflected on the department's portal, indicating lack of opportunity to contest before the impugned order. Considering these factors cumulatively, the High Court remanded the matter to the Appellate Authority for fresh consideration of the appeal, following due process and disposing it on merits expeditiously by December 31, 2024. – TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts Tax Management India – taxmanagementindia – taxmanagement – taxmanagementindia.com – TMI – TaxTMI – TMITax

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Case-Laws – GST – Highlights – The High Court addressed the issue of cancellation of registration due to non-filing of statutory returns. The court relied on its previous decision in TVL. Suguna Cutpiece Center v. The Appellate Deputy Commissioner (ST) (GST), where it had directed revocation of registration under similar circumstances, subject to certain conditions. Consequently, the court extended the same benefit to the petitioner in the present case. The petition was disposed of accordingly. – TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts Tax Management India – taxmanagementindia – taxmanagement – taxmanagementindia.com – TMI – TaxTMI – TMITax

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Case-Laws – GST – Highlights – The High Court held that the revisional authority's order placing the refund sanction order in abeyance u/s 108 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 was invalid. Section 54 prescribes the procedure for claiming refunds, and the proviso to Section 54(1) requires following the procedure u/s 49(6) for refunds from the Electronic Cash Ledger. While Section 54 lacks explicit restrictions on refunds from the Electronic Cash Ledger, similar restrictions apply. Section 108 empowers the revisional authority to stay orders deemed illegal, improper, or prejudicial to revenue interests. However, the revisional authority's doubts about the Input Tax Credit claimed by the petitioner were unrelated to the refund order's validity. Absent any finding rendering the refund order unsustainable, illegal, or invalid, invoking Section 108 was unjustified. The High Court allowed the petition, quashing the impugned order. – TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts Tax Management India – taxmanagementindia – taxmanagement – taxmanagementindia.com – TMI – TaxTMI – TMITax

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Case-Laws – GST – Highlights – Cancellation of GST registration violated petitioner's constitutional right to carry on business. Respondent should have initiated legal action for alleged fraud instead of outright cancellation, depriving petitioner from conducting business. Suspension order passed without considering petitioner's reply, rendering proceedings liable to be set aside. High Court quashed impugned proceedings, directed respondent to consider petitioner's reply and pass appropriate orders on merits to revoke suspension of GST registration in accordance with law. – TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts Tax Management India – taxmanagementindia – taxmanagement – taxmanagementindia.com – TMI – TaxTMI – TMITax

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Case-Laws – GST – Highlights – The Karnataka High Court disposed of the petition challenging the constitutional validity of Section 16(4) of the CGST and KGST Act, 2017, which was alleged to be violative of Articles 14, 19(1)(g), and 300A of the Constitution. The Court relied on its previous judgment in M/s. Sadhana Enviro Engineering Services vs. Joint Commissioner of Central Tax & others, where it held that in view of the amendment inserting Section 16(5), the petitioner should be given a reasonable opportunity and heard by the original authority, which should then proceed in accordance with law. Consequently, the present petition was allowed and disposed of in terms of the earlier judgment, directing the authorities to implement the provisions after granting a reasonable opportunity to the petitioner. – TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts Tax Management India – taxmanagementindia – taxmanagement – taxmanagementindia.com – TMI – TaxTMI – TMITax

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Case-Laws – GST – Highlights – Rule 86A of the Central/State Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017, which allows blocking of the Electronic Credit Ledger, has been held unconstitutional by the High Court due to violation of principles of natural justice. The Court observed that no pre-decisional hearing was provided to the petitioner, and the impugned order lacked independent or cogent reasons, relying solely on reports from the Enforcement Authority, which amounts to “borrowed satisfaction.” The Court relied on its previous decision in K-9-ENTERPRISES, where it held that in the absence of valid and sufficient material constituting “reasons to believe,” the mandatory requirements/prerequisites/parameters contained in Rule 86A were not fulfilled, and the respondents were not entitled to block the Electronic Credit Ledger by invoking the said Rule. Consequently, the impugned order dated 06.05.2024, blocking the petitioner's Electronic Credit Ledger u/r 86A, was quashed by the High Court for being illegal and arbitrary. – TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts Tax Management India – taxmanagementindia – taxmanagement – taxmanagementindia.com – TMI – TaxTMI – TMITax

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =