Author: admin_gst

Delhi: 2 including lawyer held for running fake GST firm racket
GST
Dated:- 21-6-2025
PTI
New Delhi, Jun 21 (PTI) Two men, including a lawyer, were arrested for allegedly operating a racket involving fake Goods and Services Tax (GST) firms and issuing bogus bills to facilitate fraudulent tax settlements in south west Delhi, an official said on Saturday.
The accused were identified as Sandeep (27), from Panipat in Haryana, and Inderpal (45), a lawyer residing in Burari, Delhi.
The duo used genuine identification documents such as PAN cards, Aadhaar cards, SIM cards, rent agreements, and email IDs to register fake GST firms, which were then used to generate fraudulent invoices, Deputy Commissioner of Police (Southwest) Amit Goel

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

added.
Sandeep, who was arrested in Panipat, revealed that he had been working with Inderpal for seven years. Together, they procured bogus GST firms from associates in Delhi and manipulated login credentials to gain control over the accounts.
“They would then update the contact details- email and mobile numbers, and use Tally software to create and upload fake invoices on the GST portal. Following Sandeep's arrest, the police traced Inderpal to Kairana in Uttar Pradesh, where he had gone into hiding,” the DCP said in a statement.
After his arrest, Inderpal disclosed that he used to buy GST firms, along with SIM cards and login credentials, for Rs 25,000 to Rs 30,000 each.
After taking over the accounts, the duo would alter the credent

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

CGST/WBGST Act 2017 allows simultaneous proceedings but taxpayers shouldn't face multiple enquiries for identical periods without logical conclusion
Case-Laws
GST
HC held that while CGST/WBGST Act 2017 does not expressly prohibit simultaneous proceedings under Chapter XIII and XIV, registered taxable persons should not ordinarily be subjected to multiple enquiries by different authorities for identical periods without logical conclusion of initiated proceedings. Where State authorities

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

HC sets aside tax assessment order for 2018-19 due to natural justice violation, remands for fresh hearing
Case-Laws
GST
The HC set aside the impugned order dated 29.04.2024 passed by Respondent No. 3 concerning assessment period 2018-2019 without examining the merits. The court found violation of principles of natural justice as proper opportunity of hearing was not provided to the petitioner, and questions arose regarding service of show cause notice and time-bar issues. The matter wa

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST registration cancellation show cause notice upheld but personal hearing ordered for suspended firm
Case-Laws
GST
The HC declined to quash a show cause notice (SCN) issued for GST registration cancellation against a firm found non-functional during investigation. The Court determined that petitioner could seek re-inspection from the Adjudicating Authority rather than judicial intervention at this preliminary stage. However, recognizing the firm's operational standstill due to registr

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Appellate authority violated natural justice by not serving notice to petitioner and passing non-speaking order under Section 107
Case-Laws
GST
The HC allowed the writ petition challenging an appellate order, finding violation of natural justice principles as the petitioner lacked adequate notice and was not served with the appeal petition and grounds. The appellate authority passed a non-speaking order without conducting necessary enquiry as mandated under Section 107(11) and (12) of t

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Petitioner granted time to reply to GST registration cancellation notice under Rule 21(b) for invoice irregularities
Case-Laws
GST
HC allowed petitioner to file reply to six-month-old show cause notice challenging GST registration cancellation under Rule 21(b) for issuing invoices without actual supply of goods or services. Court directed petitioner to disclose any pending CGST proceedings including input tax credit matters in reply by 1st July 2025. DGST must decide within one month of

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Delhi adopts CBIC circular clarifying GST treatment of vouchers under Schedule III exclusions
Circulars
GST – States
The Delhi Department of Trade & Taxes adopted CBIC Circular No. 243/37/2024-GST clarifying GST treatment of vouchers under DGST Act, 2017. The CBIC determined that voucher transactions constitute neither supply of goods nor services, as vouchers qualify as either “money” under RBI-recognized pre-paid instruments or “actionable claims” under Schedule III exclusions. Princi

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Delhi GST mandates virtual hearings via WEBEX or Google Meet with advance notice and recorded proceedings
Circulars
GST – States
The Delhi Trade & Taxes Department issued mandatory guidelines for conducting personal hearings through virtual mode under the Delhi GST Act, 2017. All proper officers and appellate authorities must conduct hearings via applications like WEBEX or Google Meet, with advance notice to taxpayers including virtual links. Taxpayers must submit authorization document

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Handling of Inadvertently Rejected records on IMS
GST
Dated:- 20-6-2025

Question 1: How can a recipient avail ITC of wrongly rejected Invoices/ Debit notes/ECO-Documents in IMS as corresponding GSTR-3B of same tax period was also filed by recipient?
Answer: In such cases recipient can request to the corresponding supplier to report the same record (without any change) in same return period's GSTR-1A or respective amendment table of subsequent GSTR-1/IFF. Thus, recipient can avail the ITC basis on amended record by accepting such record on IMS and recomputing GSTR-2B on IMS. Here the recipient will get ITC of complete amended value as original record was rejected by the recipient.
However, recipient will be able to take

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

he amendment table of GSTR-1/IFF. in any subsequent period, till the specified time limit, then the liability of supplier will not increase. As amendment table take delta value only. Thus, in present case of same values, differential liability increase will be zero.
Question 3: As a recipient taxpayer, how to reverse ITC of wrongly rejected Credit note in IMS as the corresponding GSTR-3B has already been filed?
Answer: In such cases recipient can request the concerned supplier to furnish the same Credit note (CN) without any change in the same return period's GSTR-1A or in amendment table of subsequent period's GSTR-1/IFF. Now recipient can reverse the availed ITC based on the amended CN by accepting the CN on IMS. Hence, the recipie

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Writ petition challenging CGST Act Section 122(1A) show cause notice dismissed as premature before final adjudication
Case-Laws
GST
HC dismissed the writ petition challenging the validity of show cause notice issued under CGST Act Section 122(1A). The court held that mere issuance of SCN does not infringe any rights and writ petition is premature without final adjudication order. Following established SC precedent, HC refused to interfere at preliminary stage, emphasizing that petitione

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Bail denied for accused in Rs. 704 crore fake input tax credit fraud involving 353 shell companies
Case-Laws
GST
HC dismissed regular bail application for accused involved in creating 353 fake firms to pass fraudulent input tax credit worth Rs. 704 crores. Court held economic offences of such magnitude constitute serious threat to economy and cannot be treated leniently despite being non-violent. Accused's conduct during proceedings, including suppression of criminal antecedents and att

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST assessment order set aside for improper notice service under Section 169(1) principles
Case-Laws
GST
HC set aside GST assessment order dated 27.08.2024 and Form GST DRC-07 for violating principles of natural justice. Petitioner challenged order claiming non-receipt of show cause notice uploaded only on GST Portal without personal service. Court held that mere portal upload constituted insufficient service, requiring exploration of alternative modes under Section 169(1) including RPA

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST officer must ensure proper notice service under Section 169(1) before ex-parte assessment proceedings
Case-Laws
GST
HC set aside ex-parte assessment order for violating principles of natural justice due to improper service of show cause notice. Petitioner was unaware of notice uploaded only on GST Portal without physical service or alternative delivery methods under Section 169(1) of GST Act. Court held that merely fulfilling empty formalities through ex-parte proceedings without af

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Advisory to file pending returns before expiry of three years
GST
Dated:- 19-6-2025

As per the Finance Act, 2023 (8 of 2023), dt. 31-03-2023, implemented w.e.f 01-10-2023 vide Notification No. 28/2023 – Central Tax dated 31th July, 2023, the taxpayers shall not be allowed file their GST returns after the expiry of a period of three years from the due date of furnishing the said return under Section 37 ( Outward Supply), Section 39 (payment of liability), Section 44 ( Annual Return) and Section 52 (Tax Collected at Source). These Sections cover GSTR-1, GSR-1A, GSTR 3B, GSTR-4, GSTR-5, GSTR-5A, GSTR-6, GSTR 7, GSTR 8 and GSTR 9 or 9C.
Hence, above mentioned returns will be barred for filing after expiry of three years. The said

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Assignment of government-allotted leasehold rights in immovable property exempt from GST liability
Case-Laws
GST
The HC ruled that assignment of leasehold rights in immovable property allotted by a government industrial development corporation does not constitute taxable supply under GST. Following precedent established in Gujarat Chamber of Commerce and subsequent decisions including Alfa Tools Pvt. Ltd., BVM Pharma, and Time Technoplast Limited, the court held that such assignments ar

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Assessment order quashed for denying personal hearing despite show cause notice on GST Portal requiring alternative service under Section 169
Case-Laws
GST
HC set aside assessment order dated 08.08.2024 for violating principles of natural justice where petitioner received no personal hearing opportunity. Despite show cause notice being uploaded on GST Portal, petitioner claimed unawareness and non-receipt of original notice. Court held that while portal service is valid, revenue officer

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

AAAR order on GST computation for refurbished car sales partly upheld with certain observations expunged
Case-Laws
GST
HC partly allowed the writ petition challenging the AAAR order regarding GST computation on refurbished car sales. The dispute concerned whether amounts paid to car owners and refurbishment costs should be included in purchase price for margin calculation under N/N. 08/2018-CT (Rate). Petitioner argued the appellate authority failed to address ITC issues not considered

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Bank accounts automatically de-frozen after GST appeal filed under Section 107 stays enforcement order
Case-Laws
GST
The HC disposed of a petition challenging the freezing of petitioner's bank accounts. The petitioner's grievance concerned the freezing of two additional accounts opened under the same PAN number following communication dated 16 June 2024. The court held that since an appeal under Section 107 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act 2017 had been filed against the impugn

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Recovery from Electronic Credit Ledger without following Section 78 three-month waiting period ruled illegal and arbitrary
Case-Laws
GST
HC held that respondents' recovery of amount from petitioner's Electronic Credit Ledger/Electronic Cash Ledger under Section 79 of GST Act, 2017 was illegal and arbitrary. Court found that pursuant to Section 78, recovery proceedings cannot be initiated within three months of demand becoming payable unless reasons are recorded. Additionally, under Sect

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Cash Credit Account Not Attachable Under Section 83 MGST Act, Represents Bank Liability Not Taxpayer's Property
Case-Laws
GST
HC held that a cash credit account cannot be provisionally attached under Section 83 of MGST Act, as it represents a bank liability rather than a property belonging to the account holder. The court determined that the statutory language of “any property including bank account” does not encompass cash credit accounts. Relying on precedential decisions from Gujarat

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Landmark GST Notice Invalidated: Section 74 Enforcement Lacks Jurisdictional Basis and Legal Substantiation
Case-Laws
GST
HC held that the SCN u/s 74 of GST Act, 2017 was issued without jurisdiction. The court found no ingredients present for invoking Section 74, specifically noting absence of allegations of fraud, wilful misstatement, or material suppression. Relying on precedent in a similar case involving the same tax officer, the court determined that the notice lacked requisite leg

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Independent Design Services Qualify as Zero-Rated Export, Entitling Firm to Full Input Tax Credit Refund with Statutory Interest
Case-Laws
GST
HC ruled that the petitioner, providing design and engineering services to foreign recipients on a principal-to-principal basis, does not constitute an agency relationship. The court determined that the petitioner is an independent entity supplying services directly to its foreign counterparts, thereby qualifying as zero-rated supplies under Sect

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Importers Can Claim Input Tax Credit on Re-Assessed Bill of Entry Within Specified Time Limits Under GST Rules
Case-Laws
GST
AAR ruled on Input Tax Credit (ITC) eligibility for import IGST. The authority held that TR-6 challan is not a valid document for ITC availment under GST rules. Bill of entry, whether original or re-assessed, is an eligible document for ITC, subject to Section 16(4) of CGST Act time limitations. The time limit for ITC on differential IGST begins from the re-assess

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Developer's Land-Transfer Deal Triggers Full GST Liability Under Joint Development Agreement with One-Third Land Value Deduction
Case-Laws
GST
The AAR determined that the developer-promoter's transaction involving undivided share of land and constructed residential units does not qualify as a “sale of land” under Item No. 5 of Schedule III of CGST Act. The Joint Development Agreement and subsequent sale of apartments attract GST liability. Despite the applicant's contention that the com

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Taxpayer Wins Challenge Against Conflicting Tax Assessment Orders Under GST Section 161, Highlighting Procedural Fairness
Case-Laws
GST
HC allowed the writ petition, quashing the subsequent order (Ext.P8) and rejection order (Ext.P14), recognizing that the initial order (Ext.P7) had already conclusively adjudicated the assessment discrepancies for 2017-2018. The court held that under Section 161 of the GST Act, rectification can be initiated suo motu when an error is apparent on record,

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =