Author: admin_gst

Detention Declared Illegal Under GST Law; Immediate Release Ordered with Strict Future Compliance Required
Case-Laws
GST
The HC declared the detention of the petitioner's husband by respondents No. 2 and 3 illegal and ordered his immediate release. The Court accepted the respondents' affidavit explanation but emphasized strict future compliance and cooperation with Court-appointed officers by the Directorate General, Goods & Service Tax Intelligence. Relying on precedents from the Supreme Court and various High Courts, the HC directed the jail authorities to release the petitioner forthwith, provided he is not implicated in any other case. The petition was allowed, ensuring the petitioner's husband's recovery from unlawful custody.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Regular Bail Granted After Six-Year Delay; Emphasis on Presumption of Innocence and Prolonged Trial
Case-Laws
GST
The HC granted regular bail to the petitioner, who was nominated after a six-year delay in a case filed in 2019. The petitioner had already undergone incarceration for 2 months and 19 days, and similarly situated co-accused had been granted bail. The Court noted the petitioner's clean antecedents and emphasized the presumption of innocence until proven guilty beyond reasonable doubt. Since the challan was filed recently and none of the 40 prosecution witnesses had been examined, the trial was expected to be protracted. Prolonged detention was deemed unnecessary. The petitioner was ordered to be released on furnishing bail and surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate. The petition was allowed in accordance with established criminal jurisprudence favoring bail as the norm and detention as the exception.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Petitioner entitled to CGST refund despite form errors; natural justice violation found in denial without hearing
Case-Laws
GST
The HC held that the petitioner was entitled to the CGST refund despite citation of an incorrect provision or typographical errors in the refund application forms. Such technical defects cannot justify rejection of the substantive claim. The appellate authority erred in law by dismissing the refund on this ground without adjudicating the claim on merits. Further, the adverse finding against the petitioner for failure to adduce evidence was passed without issuing a proper show cause notice or affording an opportunity of hearing, thus violating principles of natural justice. Consequently, the impugned orders were quashed, and the matter was remitted to the appellate authority for fresh determination in accordance with the observations. The petition was allowed by way of remand.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Assignment of Leasehold Rights Not a Supply of Service Under Section 7(1)(a); GST Not Applicable Under Section 9
Case-Laws
GST
The HC held that the assignment of leasehold rights by the petitioner constitutes a transfer of benefits arising from immovable property and does not amount to a supply of service under Section 7(1)(a) of the Act. Consequently, such transactions fall outside the scope of GST levy under Section 9, as clarified by Clauses 5(b) of Schedule 2 and 5 of Schedule 3 of the Act. The impugned order passed under Section 74 was quashed and set aside, and the petition was allowed, confirming that GST is not applicable on the assignment of leasehold rights in this context.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Petition Dismissed on ITC Denial and Electronic Credit Ledger Blocking Under GST Rules Section 16
Case-Laws
GST
The HC dismissed the petition challenging the blocking of the electronic credit ledger and denial of ITC, finding no violation of natural justice or jurisdictional error. Although the petitioner alleged non-availability of documents and lack of opportunity for cross-examination, the court observed that the petitioner's representative opposed re-examination and did not participate, and the adjudication order addressed the petitioner's responses comprehensively. The petitioner failed to utilize the appellate remedy and instead directly approached the HC. The court emphasized the petitioner's initial burden to produce evidence, including toll plaza reports, to substantiate transportation of goods, which was not discharged. Consequently, the State was not obligated to prove the petitioner's claim. The petitioner's reliance on a separate case concerning public auction and refund was deemed inapplicable. No illegality or irregularity was found in the proper officer's order, leading to dismissal of the petition.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Impugned order quashed on ineligible ITC claim; 25% disputed tax deposit required under GST rules
Case-Laws
GST
The HC quashed the impugned order relating to ineligible ITC claimed via an invoice from a non-existent dealer, subject to the petitioner depositing 25% of the disputed tax within 30 days. The quashed order is deemed an addendum to the show cause notice, requiring the petitioner to file a detailed reply within 30 days. Upon compliance, the blocked credit shall be unblocked, and the respondent must pass a fresh order on merits within three months. The petition is disposed of accordingly.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Notification No.56/2023 declared illegal for non-compliance with Section 168A CGST Act procedural rules
Case-Laws
GST
The HC declared Notification No.56/2023 dated 28.12.2023 as vitiated and illegal due to non-compliance with mandatory procedural conditions under Section 168A of the CGST Act, 2017, including the absence of the GST Council's recommendation. The Court relied on prior precedent addressing jurisdictional errors, violation of natural justice, and errors apparent on the record, directing reassessment by the authorities. Consequently, all impugned orders based on the invalid notification were set aside. The writ petition was disposed of accordingly.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Deposits in Electronic Cash Ledger Valid for GST Liability Under Section 49 Despite Liquidation Proceedings
Case-Laws
GST
The HC held that the petitioner's deposits in the Electronic Cash Ledger for the GST liability from April to December 2019 are valid and must be appropriated to discharge the tax liability despite the petitioner's failure to file returns due to liquidation proceedings. The Court noted that the petitioner transferred the requisite amounts timely under Section 49 of the GST enactments. The Board's subsequent clarification, which suggested fresh registration and refund applications for liquidators, was deemed a procedural facilitation and not a substantive bar to appropriation of already paid amounts. Consequently, the impugned order denying appropriation was quashed, and the petition was allowed, granting relief to the petitioner by recognizing the Electronic Cash Ledger payments as sufficient discharge of GST liability with interest and penalty.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Input Tax Credit Denial Upheld; Matter Remanded for Revised Assessment Under Section 22(17)
Case-Laws
GST
The HC dismissed the writ petitioners' challenge to the denial of input tax credit, finding that neither the assessment order nor subsequent authorities had adequately examined or verified the credit computation. The revisional authority's determination of allowable input tax credit at Rs. 36,36,100 under section 22(17) was upheld. The revisional Board's order was set aside, and the matter remanded to the AO to grant the specified credit and issue a revised assessment within eight weeks of receiving the judgment. The petition was allowed solely by way of remand to ensure the petitioners receive the input tax credit as determined by the revisional authority.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Petitioner granted extended time to file appeal under CGST Act with opportunity for personal hearings and merit-based review
Case-Laws
GST
The HC found a violation of natural justice as the Petitioner was not granted the mandated three personal hearings under the Central Goods and Services Act and was unaware of both the Show Cause Notice and the impugned order. Despite the demand of Rs. 88,474/- raised against the Petitioner without affording an opportunity to reply or appear, the Court exercised writ jurisdiction to extend the time for filing the appeal until 31 August 2025 with the requisite pre-deposit. The appeal filed within this extended period shall not be dismissed on limitation grounds and will be adjudicated on merits. The Petitioner is permitted to present its case before the Appellate Authority, which must consider it on its own merits. The petition was accordingly disposed of.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

51-Day Delay in Appeal Filing Condoned Due to Genuine Reasons, Appeal Restored with Rs. 5,000 Payment Condition
Case-Laws
GST
The HC condoned a 51-day delay in filing the appeal, finding the petitioner's reasons-time taken to gather supporting documents, reconcile records, and obtain legal advice-genuine and sufficient. The appeal was restored before the 2nd respondent subject to the petitioner paying Rs. 5,000 to the specified government medical institution within two weeks of receiving the order. The petition was disposed of accordingly.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

West Bengal records 12 pc YoY growth in GST collection for July: Mamata
GST
Dated:- 5-8-2025
PTI
Kolkata, Aug 5 (PTI) West Bengal has registered a 12 per cent year-on-year growth in gross Goods and Services Tax (GST) collections for July 2025, Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee said on Monday, citing provisional figures released by the Centre.
In a post on X, Banerjee said the state collected Rs 5,895 crore in GST revenue last month, up from Rs 5,257 crore in July 2024.
“Glad to share

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST ITC Denied and Registration Cancelled Due to Non-Genuine Supplier Under Section 16(2)(c), Penalty Quashed
Case-Laws
GST
The HC upheld the disallowance of input tax credit (ITC) and cancellation of GST registration against the petitioner, finding that the supplier was a non-genuine dealer who failed to discharge tax liability under section 16(2)(c) of the GST Act. The petitioner failed to produce documentary evidence supporting the genuineness of supplies. Unlike precedents where revenue failed to inquire with suppliers, the respondent here conducted an inquiry confirming non-payment of tax by the supplier, justifying reversal of ITC by the petitioner. However, the penalty imposed was set aside due to the absence of mandatory prior intimation in Form GST DRC-01A under section 73. Consequently, the impugned order was modified to quash the penalty, while affirming the reversal of ITC and cancellation of registration. The appeal was disposed of accordingly.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Petitioner entitled to 6% statutory interest under Section 56 CGST Act on refund after 60 days delay
Case-Laws
GST
The HC held that the petitioner is entitled to statutory interest at 6% per annum on the refund amount, commencing from the day after the expiry of sixty days from the receipt of the refund application until the refund is credited. This aligns with the precedent set by the Coordinate Bench, confirming that interest accrues under Section 56 of the CGST Act, 2017. The Court directed the respondent to pay the interest within two months. The petition was disposed of accordingly.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

HC upholds fraud findings on ITC misuse under multiple years, denies cross-examination impact, allows extended appeal deadline
Case-Laws
GST
The HC upheld the Adjudicating Authority's findings of fraudulent availment and further passing on of ITC based on invoices from non-existent entities, rejecting the petitioner's replies as insufficient to contest the investigation. The Court emphasized that establishing fraudulent ITC utilization often requires analysis across multiple financial years to reveal consistent patterns of bogus transactions. It held that the non-grant of cross-examination caused no prejudice, as all relied-upon documents were recovered from the petitioner's premises, who was aware of the actual status of the parties involved. The HC declined to reappraise factual findings in writ jurisdiction, noting its limited scope under Articles 226 and 227. The petitioner was granted an extended period until 31 August 2025 to file a time-barred appeal with requisite pre-deposit, which will be heard on merits if filed within the stipulated time. The petition was disposed of accordingly.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Petition Challenging GST Registration Cancellation Allowed Despite Alternative Remedies Under Section 30
Case-Laws
GST
The HC held that the petition challenging the cancellation of GST registration is maintainable despite the availability of an alternative remedy, given the nascent stage of the Act and the complexities faced by a layperson. The Court emphasized that cancellation directly impacts the petitioner's livelihood and State revenue, noting the constitutional right to carry on business subject to statutory compliance. The delay in invoking Section 30 of the Act was condoned in the interest of justice. The petitioner was granted three weeks to file an application under Section 30 along with all pending returns up to the cancellation date. The department is directed to consider and dispose of the application within three weeks thereafter. The petition was disposed of accordingly.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Petition Challenging GST Registration Cancellation Dismissed for Dilatory Conduct Under Writ Jurisdiction
Case-Laws
GST
The HC dismissed the petition challenging the cancellation of the petitioner's GST registration and the associated show cause notice, finding the petitioner's conduct to be dilatory and non-compliant. The court held that there was no basis for interference under its writ jurisdiction. Consequently, the petition was disposed of without restoring the GST registration. The petitioner was advised that it remains at liberty to apply for a fresh GST registration if desired.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Attorney-client privilege protects advocates from search and seizure without prima facie evidence under applicable rules
Case-Laws
GST
The HC emphasized the inviolability of attorney-client privilege, holding that search and seizure of an advocate's office, including the CPU and documents, cannot be conducted without prima facie evidence implicating the advocate beyond mere representation. The Court ruled that absent material indicating the advocate's personal involvement in alleged illegal activity, such actions amount to harassment and are impermissible. The GST Department was directed to file an affidavit substantiating its grounds for the search by the next hearing date, with the matter adjourned for further consideration.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Improper Service of Show Cause Notices Violates Natural Justice, Orders Set Aside Under Rule of Fair Hearing
Case-Laws
GST
The HC held that the Show Cause Notices (SCNs) dated 23rd September, 2023 and 4th December, 2023 were not properly served as they were uploaded only on the 'Additional Notices Tab' and were inaccessible to the Petitioner, violating principles of natural justice. Although the SCN dated 27th May, 2024 was properly uploaded, the Petitioner missed it. The impugned orders passed without affording the Petitioner an opportunity to be heard were set aside. The matter was remanded to the Adjudicating Authority for fresh adjudication on merits. The Petitioner was granted time until 31st August, 2025, to file replies to the SCNs. The petition was accordingly disposed of.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Petition Dismissed on Penalty Under Section 122(1)(ii) CGST Act for Fraudulent GST Registration Use
Case-Laws
GST
The HC dismissed the petition challenging the levy of penalty under Section 122(1)(ii) of the CGST Act, 2017, and related provisions, concerning fraudulent use of a second GST registration. The court found contradictions in the petitioner's claim of non-use of the second registration and noted the petitioner's failure to actively pursue the investigation since 2019. The petition was held to be premature for writ relief due to the necessity of factual inquiry and the expiry of the limitation period under Section 107 of the CGST Act, 2017. The court emphasized the petitioner's responsibility to safeguard its identity and held that the impugned order did not merit interference. The petitioner was directed to avail statutory remedies by filing an appeal within the prescribed time with the requisite pre-deposit.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

CGST Delhi South Commissionerate busts a racket that fraudulently availed Input Tax Credit (ITC) worth Rs.47.12 crore in iron one arrested
GST
Dated:- 4-8-2025

The Anti-Evasion Branch of CGST Delhi South Commissionerate has unearthed a large-scale fraudulently availed Input Tax Credit (ITC) racket involving a Naraina-based taxpayer engaged in trading of iron and steel items. The case involves fraudulent availment and passing on of ITC totaling Rs.47.12 crore, based on bogus invoices against a taxable value of approximately Rs.261 crore, without any actual supply of goods.
Acting on specific intelligence developed by the Anti-Evasion wing, an investigation was initiated into a suspicious supply chain. The inquiry revealed that

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Mandatory 60-Day Limit Under Section 54(7) WBGST Act Crucial for Refund Orders; Timelines and Jurisdiction Strictly Enforced
Case-Laws
GST
The HC held that the 60-day time limit under Section 54(7) of the WBGST Act, 2017 for passing an order on a refund application is mandatory and any non-compliance vitiates the order passed under Section 54(5). The PO must consider the applicant's reply and provide an opportunity of hearing within this period. The scrutiny and acknowledgment of the refund application must be completed within 15 days as per Rule 90(2). The rejection of the refund claim by the Assistant Commissioner and Appellate Authority was held unlawful as they exceeded their jurisdiction by questioning receipt of goods by the importer, which is irrelevant; the refund is contingent solely on payment of duties, evidenced by customs documents. The HC found the impugned orders and judgment legally flawed, set aside the judgment, and allowed the intra-court appeal due to the authorities' failure to adhere to mandatory timelines and exceed their statutory mandate.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Limitation for Tax Refund Claims Starts from IGST Deposit Date Under Section 77 and Rule 19(1A)
Case-Laws
GST
The HC held that the limitation period for claiming a refund of excess taxes paid under Section 77 of the BGST/CGST Act, 2017, read with Section 19 of the IGST Act and Rule 19(1A), commences from the date of deposit of the tax under the IGST Act, not from the date of SGST and CGST deposit. The Respondent authority erred in computing limitation from January 2018, rendering the statutory provisions and clarificatory Circular ineffective. The Court recognized the benevolent extension of limitation provided by the Circular for wrongful tax deposits. Consequently, the impugned order rejecting the refund application was declared legally unsustainable and set aside. The petitioner's application for refund was allowed.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Section 6(2)(b) bars multiple tax proceedings on the same matter under WBGST/CGST Act, 2017 (2)(b)
Case-Laws
GST
The HC held that proceedings under Section 6(2)(b) of the WBGST/CGST Act, 2017 bar initiation of multiple proceedings on the same subject matter by different authorities. The petitioner faced three separate proceedings by State authorities for tax periods 2018-2019, 2019-2020, and 2020-2021 under Section 73, addressing claims of exempted supply and alleged suppression of facts. Central authorities also initiated proceedings for 2018-2022 based on audit observations regarding suppression of taxable value and unreconciled turnover. The Court found no scope for further audit under Section 65, noting that notices under Section 73 were already issued under Section 65(7). Since the issues had been adjudicated by competent authorities, the HC allowed the petition, restraining any additional proceedings on the same subject matter.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Writ Petition Not Maintainable When Alternative Remedy Exists Under Section 107 of the Act of 2017
Case-Laws
GST
The HC held that the writ petition was not maintainable due to the availability of an alternative remedy under Section 107 of the Act of 2017. The petitioners' grievance, despite alleged violation of natural justice by the CGST authority for non-supply of relevant documents, must be addressed through the statutory appeal mechanism. The court emphasized that it will not entertain a writ petition when an efficacious and speedy remedy exists under the statute. The time elapsed from filing the writ petition to disposal shall be excluded for the purpose of condoning any delay in filing the appeal before the Appellate Authority. The petition was accordingly disposed of, reinforcing the principle that extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 should not override specific appeal provisions.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =