Author: admin_gst

GST valuation notices must disclose the applicable rule; confirmation on a different rule violates natural justice.
Case-Laws
GST
GST valuation proceedings require the show-cause notice to identify the valuation rule on which the proposed demand rests. Where a notice invokes Rule 28(a), but the adjudicating authority finds that rule inapplicable and instead confirms the demand under Rule 27(c), the taxpayer must receive notice and an opportunity to respond to that distinct basis. Substituting the valuation rule at adjudication causes prejudice and breaches natural justice. A fresh show-cause notice is required before proceedings may be pursued on the revised valuation basis.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Compulsory acquisition compensation is not a GST supply, making tax deductions from land acquisition awards unlawful and refundable.
Case-Laws
GST
Compulsory acquisition of land and attached structures under eminent-domain powers is an expropriation, not a supply of goods or services for GST purposes. Land and buildings are immovable property and cannot be treated as goods, while a landowner does not provide any service through statutory acquisition. GST deducted from acquisition compensation therefore lacks statutory basis, is beyond the acquiring authority's power, and must be refunded with interest. Interest awarded on compensation under the Land Acquisition Act to account for the period until payment forms part of compensation and is not subject to tax deduction at source.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Portal-only GST service does not trigger appeal limitation without acknowledged receipt or response to notice.
Case-Laws
GST
Portal-only service of GST show-cause notices is insufficient where there is no acknowledgement of receipt or response to the notice. Similarly, uploading a contested order-in-original solely on the Common Portal does not commence the limitation period for filing an appeal. Taxpayers affected by notices or adjudication orders served only through the portal may seek the remedies available for defective service, including protection against limitation being calculated from the portal-upload date alone.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST appeal delay condonation restored merits adjudication where factual challenge to tax levy required a hearing.
Case-Laws
GST
Condonation of delay beyond the ordinarily condonable period for a GST appeal was considered appropriate where rectification proceedings were not the sole explanation and the tax levy was disputed on factual grounds requiring adjudication on merits. The delay dismissal was set aside, the appeal was restored, and merits were left open for decision after an opportunity of hearing. The approach accords with treatment of a similar factual situation involving delayed GST appellate proceedings.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Reusable gunny bag classification determines GST treatment based on continued packing utility and sale value.
Case-Laws
GST
Used jute gunny bags without plastic coating remain classifiable as reusable packing bags under Heading 6305 where they are intact, identifiable and fit for repacking agricultural produce. Classification turns on the goods' condition, essential character, commercial identity and functional utility at supply; prior use or auction sale does not by itself convert them into scrap. Worn sacks and bags fall outside Heading 6309, while Heading 6310 applies only to worn-out textile materials fit solely for recovery. GST is determined by sale value per piece: 5% up to the prescribed threshold and 18% above it. Torn, worn-out or cut bags unfit for reuse require separate classification examination.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

SC sets aside show cause notice to Tata Steel over input tax credit availed during FY19-23
GST
Dated:- 26-8-2026
PTI
New Delhi, Aug 26 (PTI) The Supreme Court has set aside a show cause-cum-demand notice against Tata Steel from tax authorities over an “alleged irregular availment of input tax credit” amounting to over Rs 1,000 crore between the financial years 2019 and 2023.

According to the notice, the steel major was required to show cause before the Additional/Joint Commissioner of Central GST & Central Excise, Jamshedpur, Jharkhand within 30 days “as to why the Goods and Service Tax (GST), amounting to Rs 1007,54,83,342 for the period FY2018-19 through FY2022-23 shall not be demanded and recovered” from the company.

Th

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

of suppression of facts, merely to avail the extended period of limitation would barely suffice and puts to peril the notice under Section 74,” the bench said.

Tata Steel had contended before the top court that there is no allegation of fraud, willful misstatement or suppression of facts.

The dispute arose from a show cause notice issued to Tata Steel for the financial years 2018-19, 2019-20 and 2020-21 concerning an alleged mismatch of Input Tax Credit (ITC) and short payment of tax.

The notice was issued under Section 74 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, which deals with GST demand involving fraud or suppression.

The steel major submitted that the notice contained no factual allegations establishing fraud, wilful mis

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST demand limitation bars late notices unless extended recovery is supported by foundational fraud or suppression facts.
Case-Laws
GST
GST demand limitation under Section 73 runs from the due date for the annual return; extensions of those due dates change its commencement, and pandemic-period exclusion must be applied when calculating the three-year period. A notice issued after the resulting deadline cannot be sustained under the ordinary limitation. Recourse to Section 74's five-year period requires the Assessing Officer's satisfaction, based on disclosed foundational facts, that fraud, wilful misstatement or suppression caused the tax shortfall or excess input tax credit. Audit objections and bare statutory assertions are insufficient. The show-cause notice and consequential order were set aside, with liberty for fresh Section 74 proceedings within the applicable extended limitation.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Bail in fraudulent input tax credit allegations granted where investigation was nearly complete and further custody unnecessary.
Case-Laws
GST
Bail was granted to an accused alleged to have operated a firm used for fraudulent availment of input tax credit, although the firm was registered in his spouse's name. The High Court treated the investigation concerning the accused as almost complete and considered that certain co-accused had already received bail. Balancing the detention period against the nature and gravity of the allegations, it found that further custodial detention was unnecessary for the investigation. Release was subject to a bond and surety, monthly appearance before the Investigating Officer, and compliance until submission of the charge-sheet.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Fair hearing in budgetary support claims requires an opportunity to explain input tax credit declaration discrepancies before determination.
Case-Laws
GST
Fair hearing in budgetary support claims requires the claimant to receive an opportunity to explain discrepancies between an input tax credit declaration and a Chartered Accountant certificate submitted at the respondents' direction. Where the declaration contains an asserted error, the officer must call for an explanation and consider supporting material before concluding the claim on merits. A claim cannot be finally determined merely by relying on the discrepant declaration without this opportunity. The challenged order was set aside to that extent, with directions to permit supporting documents and reconsider the claim after a reasonable hearing.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Input tax credit time limits: Section 16(5) preserves entitlement where the relevant return was filed before the cut-off.
Case-Laws
GST
Section 16(5) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act overrides section 16(4) and preserves input tax credit entitlement for specified financial years where the return under section 39 was filed by 30 November 2021. For Financial Year 2018-19, a return filed on 23 October 2019 fell within the preserved period. Denial of the related input tax credit was therefore impermissible, and the Order-in-Original denying the claim was set aside and quashed.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Extended GST limitation requires specific fraud or suppression allegations in the show-cause notice; bare assertions invalidate proceedings.
Case-Laws
GST
Extended limitation under Section 74 of the CGST Act for fraud, wilful misstatement or suppression of facts requires the show-cause notice itself to disclose specific allegations and the factual basis supporting that inference. A bare reference to “fraud or concealment of facts” does not establish a valid basis for invoking the extended period, and deficiencies in the notice cannot be cured through a counter affidavit. Where the ordinary limitation period has expired, including applicable exclusion of time, an unsupported invocation of extended limitation renders the notice unsustainable. Further proceedings based on such a notice cannot continue.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Inter-Commissionerate transfer for Executive Assistants fails where separate cadres lack rules permitting absorption into another Commissionerate.
Case-Laws
GST
Executive Assistants are not entitled to inter-Commissionerate transfer where each Cadre Controlling Authority maintains a separate cadre and the applicable Recruitment Rules provide no absorption by transfer into another Commissionerate. The transfer policy therefore applies to this cadre, and appointment in the transferee Commissionerate cannot be secured through inter-Commissionerate transfer. Transfers treated as deemed loan arrangements may consequently result in repatriation. A request for relaxation on medical grounds may be made by representation for consideration on its merits.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

E-way bill delay without evidence of tax evasion remains a procedural lapse, requiring penalty to be set aside.
Case-Laws
GST
Transportation of motorcycles without an e-way bill at interception was treated as a procedural lapse where the e-way bill was generated shortly thereafter and the transaction was fully traceable through invoices, challans, accounts, bank records, and vehicle identification details. No discrepancy in quantity, value or classification, nor evidence of suppression, undervaluation, fake documents, unaccounted goods or intent to evade tax, was identified. The penalty was therefore set aside, and the deposited amount was refundable in accordance with law, subject to verification and statutory requirements.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Assignment of long-term leasehold rights transfers benefits of immovable property and falls outside taxable GST supply.
Case-Laws
GST
Assignment by sale or transfer of long-term leasehold rights in land and building to a third-party assignee constitutes transfer of benefits arising from immovable property. The assignee replaces the original allottee as lessee. Such assignment falls outside taxable supply under section 7(1)(a), clause 5(b) of Schedule II and clause 5 of Schedule III of the GST law, and is therefore not liable to GST. On this basis, the GST order concerning the assignment was quashed and the writ petition was allowed.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Mandatory e-way bill generation before movement makes subsequent production ineffective against tax-evasion penalties for intercepted taxable goods.
Case-Laws
GST
Rule 138(1) requires prescribed information to be furnished and an e-way bill generated before taxable goods begin moving. Transport without an e-way bill at interception was treated as establishing intent to evade tax, because later online generation could not cure the failure of statutory monitoring or prevent potential account manipulation. A manually issued invoice was not regarded as an equivalent safeguard. The appellate authority's contrary reliance on precedent was distinguished, and the original tax and penalty order under the detention provisions was restored.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST/TDS non-deposit must follow the statutory GST framework; later substantive penal provisions cannot apply retrospectively to earlier defaults.
Case-Laws
GST
GST/TDS non-deposit arising from payments for Gram Sabha works falls primarily within the U.P. Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, which provides a complete mechanism for determination of default, interest, penalty, prosecution and compounding. General penal provisions cannot be invoked unless allegations independently establish a distinct offence, such as dishonest misappropriation, forgery, cheating or wrongful gain. Substantive penal law applies prospectively: a penal provision introduced after the alleged 2017-18 default cannot create or alter the applicable offence. Proceedings based solely on Section 316(5) BNS were therefore unsustainable, while action under the GST Act remained available.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Psyllium seed classification treats dried Isabgol as taxable rather than exempt fresh or chilled plant material
Case-Laws
GST
Psyllium seeds (Isabgol) supplied in natural, raw and unprocessed form after procurement through APMC auctions are classified under Customs Tariff sub-heading 1211 90 13. The seeds are treated as dried rather than “fresh” or “chilled” plants or plant parts and therefore do not qualify for exemption under the relevant entry for fresh or chilled goods under HSN 1211. The stated conclusion treats the supply as taxable at 5%, notwithstanding a conflicting reference to exemption for goods of seed quality.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Assignment of long-term leasehold rights transfers immovable-property benefits and remains outside GST supply for third-party assignees.
Case-Laws
GST
Assignment of long-term leasehold rights in land and building to a third-party assignee transfers benefits arising from immovable property. Where the assignee replaces the original allottee as lessee, the transaction falls outside the scope of supply and is not liable to GST. Applying the binding ruling on comparable assignments, upheld by dismissal of the SLP, the High Court quashed the show cause notice and assessment order levying GST and allowed the writ petition.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ED raids several places in UP, Haryana in GST fraud case; over Rs 1 crore cash seized
GST
Dated:- 24-8-2026
PTI
Lucknow, Aug 24 (PTI) The Enforcement Directorate on Monday carried out searches at multiple locations in Uttar Pradesh and Haryana as part of a money laundering investigation linked to a GST fraud case, officials said.

Nine premises in Muzaffarnagar and Ghaziabad in Uttar Pradesh, apart from those in Haryana's Faridabad, were searched under the provisions of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) leading to seizure of Rs 1.1 crore in cash from two locations in the two UP cities, they said.

The investigation is related to “fraudulent” availment of bogus Input Tax Credit (ITC).

The probe involves a

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

AI-generated case law reliance in a tax order triggers scrutiny of citation authenticity and relevance.
Case-Laws
GST
Reliance exclusively on AI-generated case laws in a State Tax Officer's order prompted High Court scrutiny. The AGP was directed to obtain instructions on whether the cited authorities exist and are relevant to the issue. Failing such instructions, the High Court indicated it would require the officer's personal presence. If the cited case laws are non-existent or do not remotely apply, the High Court indicated that appropriate action against the officer may follow. Instructions were required by the next hearing date.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Input tax credit mismatch verification requires invoice scrutiny before confirming demand, requiring fresh adjudication after a hearing opportunity.
Case-Laws
GST
For input tax credit mismatches between FORM GSTR-3B and FORM GSTR-2A, the prescribed Circular requires the proper officer to obtain invoice details from the registered person and verify satisfaction of credit-availment conditions before confirming a demand. An ex parte demand was set aside because that verification had not occurred. Fresh consideration was directed on the taxpayer's representation, in compliance with the Circular and after a reasonable opportunity of hearing, without determination of the merits of the credit claim.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Electronic credit ledger blocking cannot create a negative input tax credit balance; excess restriction requires statutory recovery procedures.
Case-Laws
GST
Rule 86A permits only a temporary restriction on debiting input tax credit that is available in the electronic credit ledger when the rule is invoked and its conditions are met. Availability of credit is a condition precedent; the provision does not authorise authorities to create debit entries or impose a negative ledger balance. Blocking was therefore invalid to the extent it exceeded the credit then available. Wrongly availed or utilised credit must instead be recovered through the statutory remedies available under law.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST appeal delay condoned where unresolved factual questions required restoration of the statutory appeal for merits adjudication.
Case-Laws
GST
Condonation of delay in a GST appeal was granted despite filing beyond the period under section 107 because factual questions required appellate adjudication. Applying the approach in Simplex Infrastructures Ltd. in the peculiar circumstances, the High Court held that the taxpayer should receive a further opportunity to pursue the statutory appeal. The time-bar dismissal and consequential rectification order were quashed, and the appeal was restored for decision on merits after a proper hearing. All substantive contentions remained open.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Cum-tax valuation of post-composition supplies requires tax extraction from invoice values where tax was not separately collected.
Case-Laws
GST
Composition-scheme eligibility lapses automatically on the day aggregate turnover exceeds the prescribed threshold. Supplies made thereafter are taxable under the regular scheme, with adjustment for composition tax paid on post-lapse turnover; the cessation of composition eligibility was sustained. For post-lapse supplies where tax was not separately collected, invoice values must be treated as tax-inclusive because a composition taxpayer cannot collect tax separately and no additional collection was alleged. Rule 35 requires extraction of the tax component from the cum-tax value. Differential tax, and consequential interest and penalty, must therefore be recomputed on that basis.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST proceedings against a deceased proprietor were quashed, preserving lawful recovery action against the legal heir.
Case-Laws
GST
GST show cause and demand proceedings initiated against a deceased sole proprietor, after death and cancellation of the proprietorship registration, cannot be sustained. The legal heir was unconnected with the business and unaware of proceedings conducted through the GST portal. The High Court quashed the notices and consequential demand order, while preserving the authority's right to commence proper proceedings in accordance with law against the legal heir for any outstanding demand.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =