Author: admin_gst

Tax Credits Restored: Section 16 Amendments Allow Retrospective Claims for Delayed Returns Filed Between June 2018-March 2019
Case-Laws
GST
HC ruled that pursuant to clause (5) of Section 16 inserted by Finance (No.2) Act, 2024 and the circular dated 15.10.2024, the respondents' orders are set aside. The court directed respondents to permit petitioner's input tax credits for delayed returns filed during June 2018 to March 2019, effectively allowing retrospective tax credit claims despite initial administrative rejection. The judicial intervention ensures compliance with recent statutory amendments and provides relief to the taxpayer by mandating administrative reconsideration of previously denied input tax credit claims.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Appellate Rights Upheld: Statutory Deposit Prerequisite for GST Tribunal Appeal Under Section 112(9)
Case-Laws
GST
HC dismissed the appeal with a procedural directive regarding statutory stay under Section 112(9) of the Act of 2017. The court determined that upon the appointment of the President or State President of the Goods and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, the petitioner may file an appeal after statutory deposit. The authority is mandated to adjudicate the appeal strictly in accordance with law, with the statutory stay remaining operative until appeal resolution. The court's order effectively preserves the petitioner's appellate rights while maintaining procedural compliance with indirect tax regulations.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ITC Refund Allowed: Section 54(3)(ii) Enables Full Credit Recovery for Identical Input and Output Supplies
Case-Laws
GST
HC held that Section 54(3)(ii) of CGST Act permits refund of Input Tax Credit (ITC) where input and output supplies are identical, rejecting restrictive interpretations in Circular No. 135/05/2020-GST. The court found the respondent's orders erroneously relied on inapplicable circular provisions and improperly rejected refund claims. Consequently, the HC quashed the impugned orders, directing the respondent to refund the accumulated ITC with applicable interest within a specified timeframe, thereby affirming taxpayer's statutory entitlement to ITC refund under the inverted duty structure provisions.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST Levy on Leasehold Rights Transfer: Interim Order Suspends Adjudication, Maintains Status Quo Under Section 54
Case-Laws
GST
HC determined the GST levy on assignment of leasehold rights for an industrial plot and constructed buildings through third-party transfer. The court stayed the adjudication order issued against the petitioner, following a precedent in a similar case involving another corporate entity. The interim order effectively suspends the impugned order dated 28th February 2025, maintaining the status quo pending further judicial review of the GST assessment and procedural compliance.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

High Court Strikes Down GST Rule 86A Order, Restores Electronic Credit Ledger Access for Taxpayer Without Proper Procedural Justification
Case-Laws
GST
The HC allowed the petition, quashing the impugned order blocking the petitioner's Electronic Credit Ledger (ECL) under Rule 86A of CGST Rules. The court found the order legally unsustainable due to absence of pre-decisional hearing and lack of independent, cogent reasons for blocking the ECL. The respondents' reliance on borrowed satisfaction from enforcement authorities was deemed impermissible. The order's failure to provide substantive reasons for blocking the ECL, coupled with procedural irregularities, necessitated its quashing, thereby restoring the petitioner's access to the electronic credit ledger.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Tax Challenge Dismissed: Statutory Notice Upheld, Procedural Fairness Confirmed Under Section 107 of CGST Act
Case-Laws
GST
HC dismissed the petition challenging tax proceedings, finding no violation of natural justice. The petitioner received hearing notice but failed to appear, and the court clarified that statutory provisions do not mandate exactly three hearings. The court directed the petitioner to file an appeal under Section 107 of CGST Act to the Appellate Authority, effectively upholding the department's procedural actions and rejecting claims of improper notice or hearing.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Amnesty Scheme Under Section 128(A) Provides Relief for Tax Arrears, Ensures Fair Reconsideration of Undisputed Dues
Case-Laws
GST
HC allowed the petition, setting aside the impugned order and remitting the matter back to the 3rd respondent for reconsideration. The court recognized the applicability of the Amnesty Scheme under Section 128(A) of CGST Act for tax years 2017-18, 2018-19, and 2019-20. The decision emphasized that undisputed tax arrears cannot be demanded arbitrarily when express legal provisions exist under Section 75(12) of GST Acts. The petitioner was granted an opportunity to avail the benefits of the Amnesty Scheme, with directions to reconsider the matter in accordance with established legal principles.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Corporate Merger Voids Show Cause Notice: Authority Must Reissue Proceedings Against Correct Amalgamated Legal Entity
Case-Laws
GST
HC held that the respondent authority's issuance of a show cause notice (SCN) to a non-existent company post-amalgamation was procedurally flawed. Despite initial claims of unawareness, the respondent's counsel acknowledged knowledge of the amalgamation. The court set aside the impugned order and granted liberty to the respondents to initiate fresh proceedings against the resultant entity in compliance with legal protocols, effectively nullifying the previous SCN and providing an opportunity for procedural rectification.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Electronic Filing Deemed Valid: Procedural Flexibility Upheld, Certified Copy Delay Does Not Invalidate Submission Under CGST Rule 108(3)
Case-Laws
GST
HC allowed the appeal, finding the filing procedurally valid despite delay in certified copy submission. The court determined that online filing with electronic documents constitutes complete submission, and physical certification is not mandatory. Relying on precedent from Chegg India Private Limited, the HC held that technological advancements in filing systems should be interpreted liberally. The subsequent amendment to Rule 108(3) of CGST Rules, 2017 supports retrospective application, thereby validating the appellant's original submission. The court emphasized that technical procedural requirements should not impede substantive hearing of appeals on merits.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Zero-Rated Supplies Beyond Customs Frontiers Validated Under IGST Act Section 16, Ensuring Tax Neutrality and Refund Processing
Case-Laws
GST
HC determined that supplies by petitioner outside customs frontiers qualify as zero-rated under Section 16 of IGST Act, rendering the transaction GST-exempt. The court found the tax treatment revenue neutral, particularly for the period before 01.04.2021, and declined revenue's challenge. The third-party refund application must be processed within four weeks, including applicable interest, effectively disposing of the appeal without substantial monetary implications for either party.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Tax Notice Invalidated: Improper Service Violates Natural Justice, Requires Fresh Adjudication Under Procedural Guidelines
Case-Laws
GST
HC held that the SCN was improperly served by uploading it to the Additional notices tab, violating principles of natural justice. Following precedent, the SCN was set aside. The Adjudicating Authority must reissue the SCN and pass a fresh adjudication order, which remains subject to potential Supreme Court review of the underlying notification. The demand order dated 27th December 2023 was consequently nullified due to procedural irregularities in SCN service, effectively rendering the original tax demand invalid.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Taxpayers Win: Rule 86A Limits on Input Tax Credit Ledger Automatically Expire After One Year
Case-Laws
GST
HC ruled that blocking of Input Tax Credit (ITC) ledger beyond one year under Rule 86A of CGST Rules, 2017, must be lifted. The statutory interpretation of Rule 86A(3) mandates automatic removal of credit restrictions after the specified time period. The court's decision explicitly notes that lifting the ITC block is independent of any concurrent administrative or legal proceedings against the taxpayer. The restriction is therefore automatically terminated after the one-year period, providing relief to the petitioner while preserving the authority's right to pursue separate investigative actions.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Audit Compliance Mandate: GST Authorities Must Swiftly Provide Records to C&AG for Comprehensive Financial Scrutiny Under Article 149
Circulars
GST
The CBIC issued Instruction No. 05/2025-GST addressing timely production of records for audit, referencing C&AG Audit Report 7 of 2024. Invoking Article 149 of the Constitution, the instruction mandates field formations to expeditiously provide records and information to C&AG audit teams. Tax authorities must sensitize officers to promptly submit required documentation, including requesting taxpayers to furnish necessary documents when records are unavailable. The directive aims to facilitate comprehensive statutory audit processes by ensuring complete and timely access to relevant financial and tax-related records across government tax formations.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Invoice-wise Reporting Functionality in Form GSTR-7 on portal
GST
Dated:- 7-5-2025

Vide Notification No. 09/2025 – Central Tax dated 11.02.2025, Form GSTR-7 has been amended to capture invoice-wise reporting with effect from 01.04.2025 i.e. the return period for April 2025 onwards.
In this regard it is to inform that development and testing of the same is underway, the implementation of invoice-wise reporting in Form GSTR-7 in GST portal will be deployed on portal soon. Thus, the e

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Tax Dispute Resolution: Petitioner Granted Reply Opportunity and Right to Appeal Amid Pending Notification Validity Challenge
Case-Laws
GST
HC adjudicated a tax dispute involving notification challenges, granting the petitioner an opportunity to file a reply to the Show Cause Notice (SCN) within one month. The court noted that the SCN was uploaded on an additional tab without the petitioner's direct knowledge. The proceedings were deemed subject to the Supreme Court's pending decision on the validity of the impugned notifications. The court permitted the petitioner to pursue appellate remedies while reserving final determination pending the Supreme Court's verdict. The petition was disposed of with directions for the adjudicating authority to hear the petitioner's arguments on merits without passing default orders.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Anticipatory Bail Granted in Tax Fraud Case: Conditional Release Emphasizes Cooperation and Investigation Compliance
Case-Laws
GST
HC granted anticipatory bail in a tax fraud case, finding custodial interrogation unwarranted. The court determined that pre-trial incarceration was unnecessary given the petitioner's asset declaration and potential for recovery through legal means. Bail was conditionally granted, requiring the petitioner to join the investigation within seven days, cooperate fully with investigating authorities, and comply with specified terms. The court emphasized preventing irreversible injustice while maintaining investigative integrity. The petitioner must submit to deemed custody, participate in the investigation when summoned, and risk bail cancellation for non-compliance. The order underscores judicial discretion in balancing investigative needs with individual liberty rights.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Tax Authority's Section 74(9) Order Upheld: Procedural Validity Confirmed, Jurisdictional Challenge Dismissed
Case-Laws
GST
HC upheld the state tax authority's order under Section 74(9) of BGST Act, finding no jurisdictional error in issuing the demand notice. The court determined that the order was legally valid, as it was passed after proper service of show cause notice, and the petitioner failed to contest the substantive facts. The HC rejected arguments about parallel investigations, confirming the authority's right to proceed with tax assessment despite ongoing central agency investigations, thereby maintaining procedural integrity in tax proceedings.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Tax Relief Roadmap: Section 128A Clarifies Eligibility and Compliance for KGST Taxpayers with Flexible Verification Process
Circulars
GST – States
The Karnataka Commercial Taxes Dept issued a circular clarifying the implementation of Section 128A of the KGST Act, 2017. The circular addresses two key issues: (1) taxpayers who paid tax through GSTR-3B before 1st November 2024 remain eligible for benefits under Section 128A, subject to proper officer verification; and (2) for notices/orders spanning periods partially within and outside Section 128A's scope, taxpayers can file specific forms (SPL-01/SPL-02) after paying tax liability for covered periods, with appellate authorities empowered to adjudicate remaining periods appropriately. The circular aims to provide clarity and uniformity in implementing the statutory provisions.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Tax Assessment Orders Invalidated for Exceeding Four-Year Limitation Period Under Rule 14A (5A) for 2014-2017
Case-Laws
GST
HC held that assessment orders for tax years 2014-2015 and 2016-2017 were time-barred under Rule 14A (5A), which mandates assessments must be completed within four years from the date of return filing. The court invalidated assessment orders dated 12.07.2021 and 30.07.2021 as they exceeded the statutory limitation period. For 2015-2016, only assessments related to March were deemed valid, with the court emphasizing that the limitation period is mandatory and binding. The judgment reinforces strict adherence to prescribed time limits in tax assessment proceedings, effectively setting aside assessments conducted beyond the prescribed four-year window.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Challenging Tax Refund Appeals: Commissioner's Appeal Does Not Automatically Suspend Refund Order Under Section 54(11)
Case-Laws
GST
HC held that a Commissioner's mere decision to appeal does not automatically suspend a refund order under Section 54(11). The plain statutory language indicates that the pendency of an appeal does not ipso facto place the principal order in abeyance. Relying on prior judicial precedent, the court mandated that the revenue authority must comply with the appellate order and release the refund amount with applicable statutory interest. The writ petition was consequently allowed, directing immediate refund to the petitioner.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Refund Claim Upheld: Arbitrary Filing Date Restriction Invalidated, Statutory Two-Year Limitation Period Preserved for Input Tax Credit
Case-Laws
GST
HC ruled that the petitioner's refund claim for accumulated ITC was improperly rejected. Applying precedent from Patanjali case, the court held that filing a refund application after 18.07.2022 does not automatically disqualify an applicant from seeking refund within the statutory two-year limitation period. The notification creating an arbitrary classification among assessees based on filing date was deemed invalid. Consequently, the court quashed the rejection orders dated 24.02.2023 and 30.01.2023, thereby allowing the petitioner's refund claim and upholding the statutory right to file claims within the prescribed time limit.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Legal Challenge Succeeds: GST Portal Notice Invalidated Due to Improper Service and Technical Procedural Errors
Case-Laws
GST
HC found a violation of natural justice where respondent issued a show cause notice via GST Portal without direct service, preventing petitioner's reply. Despite initially being disinclined to set aside the impugned order, the court recognized technical errors in GSTR-3B table entries (6A and 6I). Consequently, the HC set aside the order dated 26.12.2024 and remanded the matter for reconsideration, providing petitioner an opportunity to rectify the incorrect value specifications. The rectification application's rejection order was set aside, effectively allowing the petition through procedural remand.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Leasehold Rights Transfer for Industrial Land Exempt from GST Under Section 7(1)(a) of GST Act
Case-Laws
GST
HC ruled that transfer of leasehold rights for industrial land is not subject to GST taxation. The court found that assignment/sale of leasehold rights constitutes transfer of immovable property benefits, which falls outside GST applicability under Section 7(1)(a) of GST Act, read with Schedule II and Schedule III. Relying on precedent in Gujarat Chamber of Commerce case, the court quashed the respondent's order, effectively exempting the transaction from GST levy. Petition was allowed, establishing that such leasehold rights transfer does not trigger GST obligations.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Input Tax Credit Claim Upheld: Section 16(4) Validates Retrospective Credit for Financial Years 2017-2021
Case-Laws
GST
HC allowed the writ petition, setting aside the appeal and assessment orders. The court held that under Section 16(4) of the CGST Act, the petitioner was entitled to claim input tax credit for Financial Years 2017-2018 through 2020-2021, which was previously rejected. The credit was sought within the prescribed timeline of 30.11.2021, specifically on 31.10.2019. The matter was remanded to the first respondent to issue a fresh assessment order in accordance with Section 16(5) of the CGST Act, ensuring compliance with statutory provisions governing input tax credit claims.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Tax Recovery Halted: Statutory Timelines Violated, Premature Action Rejected, Full Refund and Interest Ordered Under CGST Act Sections 78 and 79
Case-Laws
GST
HC held that the recovery of tax dues from the petitioner was premature and in violation of statutory provisions under Sections 78 and 79 of CGST/BGST Act, 2017. The Recovery Officer was mandated to wait three months from the date of service order before initiating recovery proceedings. The impugned orders rejecting Input Tax Credit claims were set aside due to retrospective amendment under Section 16(5). Respondent authorities were directed to refund the recovered amount of Rs.50,75,214/- within two weeks, with 12% per annum interest in case of default. The second appeal could not be preferred as the Tribunal was not constituted, effectively suspending the appeal timeline.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =