Goods and Services Tax

Tax Credit Dispute Resolved: Authority Ordered to Re-examine Order, Correct Computational Errors, and Provide Personal Hearing
Case-Laws
GST
HC ruled on tax credit dispute involving duplicative show cause notices. The court mandated that the original adjudicating authority must re-examine the orders specifically pertaining to the petitioner, addressing computational errors. A mandatory personal hearing was prescribed before order correction. The authority was directed to issue a corrected order within thirty days, communicating it to the petitioner via specified contact details. Upon receiving the corrected order, the petitioner retains full legal recourse as per statutory provisions. The petition was consequently disposed of, providing procedural relief and ensuring administrative rectification of tax credit assessment.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Areca Nuts Seizure: Administrative Response Clarified, Petitioner Directed to Seek Provisional Release Through Proper Channels
Case-Laws
GST
HC dismissed the writ petition involving seizure of areca nuts consignment. The court clarified that the communication dated 6th May, 2025 was merely a response to the petitioner's earlier letter and not an adjudication order. The court directed GST Department to issue a Show Cause Notice in accordance with law and allowed the petitioner to seek provisional release of goods through the appropriate adjudicating authority. The petition was disposed of without granting immediate relief, leaving further procedural steps to administrative authorities.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Petitioner's Rectification Plea Dismissed, Appeal Window Open Under Section 107 of CGST Act Until July 10, 2025
Case-Laws
GST
HC rejected the rectification application, finding no procedural fault by the Respondent-Department. The Court held that the petitioner failed to provide substantive reasoning in the application. While granting time until 10th July, 2025 to file an appeal under Section 107 of CGST Act, the Court left open the issue of notification validity, subject to pending Supreme Court and High Court decisions in related matters. The petitioner was advised to pursue remedies through the appellate authority, with the final determination contingent on ongoing judicial proceedings.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Tax Show Cause Notice Upheld: Fraud Allegations Need Substantive Content, Not Exact Statutory Wording for Extended Limitation
Case-Laws
GST
HC dismissed the writ petition challenging a tax show cause notice, holding that allegations of fraud or misstatement need not precisely mirror statutory language to invoke extended limitation under Section 74. The court found the notice's allegations sufficiently substantive and non-supply of a specific document does not automatically vitiate proceedings. The petitioner retains right to raise substantive arguments in appellate proceedings, with the dismissal focusing on procedural maintainability of the writ petition under Article 226. The court explicitly preserved the petitioner's right to contest merits before the appellate authority.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Judicial Intervention Mandates Fresh Review of Tax Refund Claim, Ensuring Fair Hearing and Potential Full Credit
Case-Laws
GST
HC set aside the appellate authority's order dated 11th December, 2023 rejecting the petitioner's refund application. The court remanded the matter for fresh hearing, directing the appellate authority to conduct a de novo review within three weeks, assign a different officer, and provide the petitioner an opportunity to be heard. If the refund is found valid, the entire amount must be credited to the petitioner's ledger with appropriate statutory interest. The court criticized the respondents' procedural approach, highlighting the petitioner's registration restoration and subsequent refund claim's unjust rejection.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Procedural Errors Invalidate Goods Seizure: Authorities Must Follow Strict GST Act Protocols for Proper Enforcement
Case-Laws
GST
HC invalidated goods seizure due to procedural non-compliance with GST Act. The court directed authorities to: (i) issue Section 129(3) notice within two days, (ii) ascertain tax documents within three days, (iii) provide notice and opportunity to petitioner, (iv) release petitioner's goods under Section 129(1), and (v) initiate Section 130 proceedings only after completing prescribed steps. The ruling emphasized strict adherence to legal procedures and mandated that tax authorities must follow proper protocols during goods confiscation, highlighting the need for systematic training and procedural sensitization among enforcement officers.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

High Court Strikes Down GST Assessment Order for Procedural Flaws, Mandates Proper Documentation and Signature Compliance
Case-Laws
GST
HC invalidated the GST assessment order due to procedural irregularities, specifically the absence of a Document Identification Number (DIN) and the assessing officer's signature. The court set aside the original assessment order in Form GST DRC-07 and the related bank attachment order. The 1st respondent was granted liberty to conduct a fresh assessment after providing proper notice and ensuring appropriate signature. The limitation period is to be calculated excluding the time between the original assessment order and the court's current ruling. No costs were awarded.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Procedural Lapses in GST Notice Invalidate Department's Order Due to Non-Compliance with Statutory Upload and Communication Requirements
Case-Laws
GST
HC found procedural irregularities in GST Department's notice and order issuance. The Show Cause Notice was not uploaded on the portal, and the order signed on 30th April 2024 was uploaded on 5th May 2024, beyond prescribed limitation period. HC directed GST Department to establish a Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) ensuring: (a) portal uploads of all communications, email notifications, and speed post dispatch; (b) consistent signature and Digital Identification Number (DIN) protocols on notices and orders; (c) simultaneous order passing and portal upload. Department instructed to review existing protocols and implement comprehensive guidelines addressing these procedural deficiencies.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Tax Authorities Issue Show Cause Notice for Fraudulent Input Tax Credit, Petitioner Directed to Pursue Statutory Appellate Remedy Under Section 107
Case-Laws
GST
HC dismissed the writ petition challenging a Show Cause Notice under CGST Act for fraudulent Input Tax Credit. The court held that the case involves complex factual issues requiring deeper evidentiary examination, and the petitioner must pursue statutory remedy through appellate proceedings under Section 107 of CGST Act. The court noted no jurisdictional defect or arbitrary action by the tax authorities and directed the petitioner to file an appeal with mandatory pre-deposit by the specified date, effectively relegating the dispute to the appropriate appellate forum for comprehensive adjudication.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Statutory Limitations Bar Appeal: Tax Authority's Penalty for Stock Shortage Upheld Under OGST Act Sections 122 and 130
Case-Laws
GST
HC dismissed the writ petition challenging the appellate authority's rejection of an appeal beyond statutory limitation period. The court upheld the show cause notice and redemption fine imposed under Sections 122 and 130 of the OGST Act, 2017, for stock shortage discovered during a search and seizure operation. The petitioner's attempt to challenge the procedural aspects under Article 226 was rejected, with the court noting the petitioner's earlier admission of stock shortage and concurrence with penalty payment. The decision emphasized adherence to statutory limitations and judicial discipline, finding no merit in the challenge to the authority's jurisdiction or powers.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST Registration Revocation: Petitioner Granted Opportunity to Rectify Defaults and Restore Compliance Under Rule 22(4)
Case-Laws
GST
HC allows GST registration revocation petition, directing petitioner to approach designated authority within 2 months and submit pending returns with full tax dues, interest, and late fees. If all requirements under Rule 22(4) of CGST Rules, 2017 are met, authority must expeditiously restore registration. Statutory limitation periods under Section 73(10) commence from order date, with petitioner liable for outstanding arrears including taxes, penalties, interest, and late fees.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Consolidated Appeal Allowed: Taxpayer Granted Opportunity to Challenge Wrongful Input Tax Credit Under Section 107
Case-Laws
GST
HC permits consolidated appeal under Section 107 of CGST Act for wrongful ITC availment across multiple financial years. The petitioner is granted time until 10th July, 2025 to file the appeal with mandatory pre-deposit. The court allows challenging the GST DRC-07 form's validity before the Appellate Authority. The petition is disposed of, providing procedural relief and opportunity for the petitioner to contest the tax demand through a unified appellate process.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Procedural Safeguards Upheld: Petitioners Granted Appeal Window and Fair Hearing Opportunity Under GST Act Provisions
Case-Laws
GST
HC dismissed the writ petition but provided significant procedural relief. The court found the petitioners could not establish ownership of goods under Section 129(1)(a) of WBGST & CGST Act. However, the court granted the petitioners a 4-week window to file an appeal, which must be heard on merits within 16 weeks. The appellate authority must provide an opportunity for the petitioners to establish ownership, ensure fair cross-examination of key witnesses, and allow manual appeal filing with respondents' assistance. The decision preserves the petitioners' right to challenge the original order while maintaining procedural fairness.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST Registration Restoration: Petitioner Granted Opportunity to Rectify Compliance and Seek Reinstatement Under CGST Rules
Case-Laws
GST
HC allowed the writ petition, directing the petitioner to approach the concerned tax authority within two months to seek restoration of GST registration. The court held that if the petitioner submits pending returns, pays tax dues, interest, and late fees in compliance with CGST Rules, 2017, the authority must expeditiously consider and process the registration restoration. The decision provides a procedural pathway for the petitioner to rectify GST registration cancellation by fulfilling statutory requirements.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Solar Power Plant Installation Deemed Works Contract: 12% and 18% IGST Applied Based on Goods and Services Ratio
Case-Laws
GST
The AAR determined that supply, design, installation, testing, and commissioning of grid-connected rooftop solar power plants constitute a composite works contract involving immovable property. The ruling established a bifurcated tax treatment: 12% IGST on 70% of the gross value (representing goods component) and 18% IGST on 30% of the gross value (representing services component). The decision hinged on the permanent nature of the solar installation, interpreting it as inseparably attached to the earth, thus qualifying as a works contract under GST regulations. The tax calculation is based on the total gross consideration charged by the supplier.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Electronic Cash Ledger Payment Directive Upheld: Administrative Order Survives Constitutional Challenge Without Procedural Irregularities
Case-Laws
GST
SC dismissed the Special Leave Petition challenging an administrative directive regarding electronic cash ledger payment mandates. The constitutional challenge under Article 14 was rejected after noting the recent deletion of CGST Rule 96(10) in 2024. The HC's original order remained undisturbed, with the court finding no procedural or substantive irregularities warranting judicial intervention in the electronic payment mechanism. The petition challenging the arbitrary administrative instruction was consequently unsuccessful, maintaining the existing regulatory framework for tax compliance through electronic credit ledger mechanisms.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Seizure of Mentha Oil Upheld: GST Act Sections 35, 73/74 Govern Accounting Discrepancies and Tax Determination
Case-Laws
GST
HC dismissed the writ petition challenging seizure of unaccounted mentha oil and caustic soda. The court held that under GST Act, section 35 mandates proper accounting of goods, and when discrepancies are found, sections 73/74 shall apply for tax determination. Section 130 cannot be invoked for proceedings related to excess stock discovered during survey. Precedents from previous judgments, including the court's own ruling in M/s Vijay Trading Company and subsequent SC orders, consistently affirmed that section 130 is inapplicable in such scenarios. The court found no merit in the challenge and dismissed the petition, upholding the original seizure and penalty orders.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Input Tax Credit Denied for Unsold Inventory at GST Transition, Precedent Limits Dealer's Retrospective Credit Claims
Case-Laws
GST
HC held that a registered dealer cannot claim Input Tax Credit (ITC) for goods remaining in closing stock that were not re-sold before GST regime introduction. The court determined that since the goods were unsold at the transition point (1.7.2017), the dealer cannot treat the input tax as credit. The judgment affirmed that GST Act's implementation effectively terminated ITC entitlements under the previous VAT Act for unsold inventory. By referencing precedent in S/S Janki Industries, the court conclusively ruled against the dealer's claim, allowing revision and denying ITC carry-forward for unsold stock.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Anticipatory Bail Denied: Applicant Linked to Fictitious Firm Fails to Secure Pre-Arrest Relief Under GST Inquiry
Case-Laws
GST
HC denied transit anticipatory bail for applicant associated with a non-existent firm facing GST inquiry summons. The court emphasized that pre-arrest bail should typically be sought in the jurisdictional court. Transit anticipatory bail is an exceptional remedy, not routinely granted. The application was dismissed due to applicant's absence during hearing and lack of exceptional circumstances justifying pre-arrest bail relief. The court referenced SC precedent highlighting the limited scope of transit anticipatory bail, underscoring that such relief requires demonstrable prejudice to the accused that cannot be addressed through standard legal mechanisms.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Digital Signatures Critical: GST Show Cause Notice Invalidated for Procedural Defect in Signature Authentication Process
Case-Laws
GST
HC ruled that the show cause notice under section 73 and Form GST DRC-01A were procedurally invalid due to absence of digital signatures as mandated by Rule 26(3) of Jharkhand GST Rules, 2017. The court found the notices and subsequent order (Annexure-7 and 8) vitiated by the signature defect. While setting aside these documents, the HC granted liberty to respondents to reinitiate proceedings correctly, ensuring proper digital authentication, providing opportunity for reply, and passing a reasoned order in compliance with legal requirements.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Legal Challenge Succeeds: GST Registration Cancellation Invalidated Due to Procedural Defects in Show Cause Notice
Case-Laws
GST
HC found the show cause notice procedurally defective due to lack of critical administrative details, rendering the GST registration cancellation order invalid. The notice failed to specify the issuing authority's name, designation, and hearing particulars. The cancellation order was deemed cryptic and demonstrated non-application of mind. Consequently, the HC set aside the show cause notice, cancellation orders, and recovery notice. The court permitted respondents to initiate fresh proceedings with a properly drafted show cause notice, ensuring due process and providing the petitioner full opportunity for personal hearing and representation.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST Registration Cancellation Quashed: Authorities Violated Natural Justice by Improper Notice and Hearing Procedure
Case-Laws
GST
HC allowed petitioner's writ challenging GST registration cancellation. The ex parte order was found non-speaking and violated principles of natural justice. The court held that show cause notice uploaded on GST portal without adequate communication constituted procedural impropriety. Statutory authorities failed to provide reasonable opportunity of hearing. Court set aside cancellation order, restored petitioner's GST registration, and directed concerned authority to accept belated returns within three months. The order emphasized constitutional protection under Article 19(1)(g) and quasi-judicial function requirements in administrative proceedings.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Transshipment Penalty Dismissed: Technical Portal Errors Not Sufficient Grounds for Direct Writ Challenge, Appellate Remedy Preferred
Case-Laws
GST
HC dismissed the writ petition on grounds of alternative remedy being available. The petitioner challenged penalty and e-way bill validity arising from technical portal errors during transshipment due to vehicle breakdown. Despite contentions regarding bill extension and portal glitches, the court held that the appellate authority remains competent to examine all substantive and procedural aspects if an appeal is filed in accordance with law. The petition was consequently rejected, emphasizing exhaustion of statutory remedies before seeking extraordinary writ jurisdiction.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Air Conditioning and Fire Extinguishing Systems Lease Ruling Sent Back for Comprehensive Tax Classification Review
Case-Laws
GST
The AAAR remanded the case to the WBAAR for a fresh determination of the tax classification for leasing/rental services involving air conditioning and fire extinguishing systems. The appellate authority found that the previous ruling cannot be considered a binding precedent, as advance rulings are specific to individual applicants under Section 103 of the CGST Act, 2017. The case requires a comprehensive examination of the contractual agreement to ascertain the precise nature of asset use and whether the items constitute goods or become part of immovable property. The AAAR directed the WBAAR to conduct a detailed reassessment, considering all relevant aspects, including the existing 28% GST payment, and issue a new ruling.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Water Quality Management Contracts Clarified: Tax Exemption Based on Service Composition and Goods Percentage Threshold
Case-Laws
GST
The AAR determined the tax classification for various water quality management service contracts. Pure services involving operation, maintenance, consultancy, and management without goods supply qualify for tax exemption under Notification No. 12/2017-Central Tax (Rate). Contracts involving composite supplies with goods exceeding 25% of contract value will be taxed differently. Specific work orders were analyzed, distinguishing between pure services (exempt), composite supplies (partially taxable), and pure goods supply (fully taxable). The ruling emphasized the constitutional context of water management services under Articles 243G and 243W, providing a nuanced interpretation of service and goods classification for tax purposes.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =