Author: admin_gst

Case-Laws – GST – Highlights – The court dealt with the power to cancel GST registration retrospectively u/s 29 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. It held that while the provision enables retrospective cancellation, the mere existence of such power does not justify its invocation. The order u/s 29(2) must reflect reasons for cancelling registration retrospectively, considering the deleterious consequences. The power cannot be exercised robotically or routinely unless circumstances warrant. The impugned order lacked reasoning for retroactive cancellation, violating the statutory scheme. Relying on Ramesh Chander's case, the court emphasized that retrospective cancellation should consider denying input tax credit to customers, and such consequences must be intended and warranted. Failing to provide even rudimentary reasons, the impugned order was quashed, and the petition was allowed. – TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts Tax Management India – taxmanagementindia – taxmanagement – taxmanagementindia.com – TMI – TaxTMI – TMITax

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Case-Laws – GST – Highlights – The High Court examined whether proper show cause notices were issued before passing impugned orders u/s 73(9) of the State GST Act. It held that the summary of show cause notice along with tax determination cannot substitute a valid show cause notice initiating proceedings u/s 73. The Court opined that the impugned orders were contrary to Section 73 and Rule 142(1)(a) as they were passed without issuing a proper show cause notice. Regarding the determination of tax and order attached to the summary, the Court held that as per Sections 73(3) and 73(9), only the proper officer can issue show cause notice, statement, and order. Section 2(91) defines the proper officer. Failure to authenticate by the proper officer renders the documents ineffective. The Court stated that unless Rules are amended, Rule 26(3) authentication must be followed when the proper officer issues notices/orders. On conformity with Section 75(4) and principles of natural justice, the Court held that when the statute mandates an opportunity of hearing, it must be provided. Merely mentioning the reply date in the summary without other hearing details like date, time, and venue is insufficient. If no reply is filed, passing an adverse order without a hearing opportunity would render Section 75(4) redundant. Consequently, the impugned orders were set aside, and the pet. – TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts Tax Management India – taxmanagementindia – taxmanagement – taxmanagementindia.com – TMI – TaxTMI – TMITax

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Case-Laws – GST – Highlights – The High Court quashed the order dated 20 December 2023, issued u/s 168A of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, demanding Integrated Goods and Services Tax (IGST) on reinsurance services provided by a multinational insurance company registered as a foreign reinsurance branch with IRDAI and the Ministry of Corporate Affairs, for the period 01 July 2017 to 25 July 2018. The court held that the amendments introduced by the GST Council and the Union Government through Notification No. 09/2023 and No. 56, specifically including Serial No. 40 in Entry 36A, were curative in nature and regularized the period from 01 July 2017 to 26 July 2018. Consequently, the impugned order, relating to the same period, could not be sustained in light of the respondents' stand, and the petition was allowed. – TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts Tax Management India – taxmanagementindia – taxmanagement – taxmanagementindia.com – TMI – TaxTMI – TMITax

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Case-Laws – GST – Highlights – Time limitation for appeal against order u/ss 73 or 74 of GST Act cannot be condoned beyond prescribed period. Notification dated 02.11.2023 allowing filing of appeal by 31.01.2024 without limitation applies only to orders passed on or before 31.03.2023. For impugned order dated 20.07.2023, notification is inapplicable. Delay in filing appeal cannot be condoned as per M/s Yadav Steels [2024 (2) TMI 1069 – ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT]. Petitions dismissed by High Court for lack of merit. – TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts Tax Management India – taxmanagementindia – taxmanagement – taxmanagementindia.com – TMI – TaxTMI – TMITax

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Case-Laws – GST – Highlights – The Supreme Court interpreted clauses (c) and (d) of sub-section (5) of Section 17 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. Regarding clause (c), the Court held that there is no scope to give any meaning other than its plain and natural meaning, excluding works contract services from input tax credit (ITC). Regarding clause (d), the Court held that the expression “plant or machinery” cannot be given the same meaning as “plant and machinery” defined in the explanation to Section 17. The expression “plant or machinery” in clause (d) should be given its ordinary meaning, and whether a building qualifies as a plant depends on the business of the registered person and the role of the building in that business. If the construction of a building is essential for supplying services like renting or leasing, it could be considered a plant under clause (d). The writ petitions were rejected, subject to this interpretation of clause (d). – TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts Tax Management India – taxmanagementindia – taxmanagement – taxmanagementindia.com – TMI – TaxTMI – TMITax

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Case-Laws – GST – Highlights – The applicant purchases second-hand gold or diamond jewelry from unregistered individuals, melts and transforms them into new pieces, altering their nature and characteristics. This process constitutes manufacturing u/s 2(72) of the GST Act, where the purchased gold is used as a raw material or input to make a new commodity. When the applicant melts the jewelry into gold lumps, the nature of the goods changes, and the characteristics and classification are altered. In such cases, the applicant cannot avail the benefit of Rule 32(5) of the CGST Rules, 2017, which allows paying GST on the margin value (difference between selling and purchase price) for second-hand goods. The applicant cannot adopt the valuation method prescribed in Rule 32(5) when the old jewelry is melted to manufacture a new ornament. However, if the old gold ornaments are purchased and supplied after minor processing that does not change their nature, the applicant can pay tax on the value determined u/r 32(5). Rule 32(5) is available only when a registered person deals solely in buying and selling second-hand goods. If engaged in other activities like manufacturing or selling new articles, the applicant cannot avail the benefit of Rule 32(5) and must pay GST at the applicable rate on the actual value of the commodity, not the margin value. – TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts Tax Management India – taxmanagementindia – taxmanagement – taxmanagementindia.com – TMI – TaxTMI – TMITax

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Case-Laws – GST – Highlights – Interest charges by HDFC Bank Ltd on loans are an inward supply of exempted services for the applicant. As per Notification No. 12/2017-Central Tax (Rate), services by way of extending deposits, loans or advances, where consideration is interest or discount (excluding credit card services), are exempt from GST. Since HDFC Bank is a registered person under GST, the supply of exempted services by way of interest on loans constitutes part of the applicant's total inward supply for computing the 80% threshold limit. The Advance Ruling Authority held that such interest charges qualify as inward supply from a registered supplier for calculating the 80% threshold. – TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts Tax Management India – taxmanagementindia – taxmanagement – taxmanagementindia.com – TMI – TaxTMI – TMITax

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Case-Laws – GST – Highlights – The case involves the classification of a composite supply of outdoor catering services along with renting of premises. It is held that where the applicant provides renting of premises along with the supply of food at any event, such a composite supply would attract GST at 5% with the restriction of input tax credit, subject to the condition that the room tariff does not exceed Rs. 7,500 per unit per day or equivalent. The clarification provided in CBIC Circular 27/01/2018-GST dated 04.01.2018 is to be followed to determine whether the applicant is located in 'specified premises' or the supply is provided at 'specified premises'. The composite supply of catering services within the club premises along with renting of premises falls under 'outdoor catering service together with renting of premises' arranged at premises other than 'specified premises', and GST is payable on the whole consideration at 5% without input tax credit, subject to the imposed condition. – TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts Tax Management India – taxmanagementindia – taxmanagement – taxmanagementindia.com – TMI – TaxTMI – TMITax

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Case-Laws – GST – Highlights – Baby carriers with hip seats, made of textile fabric, are classified under HSN code 6307 90 as “other made up articles” of textiles, rather than as parts or accessories of motor vehicles. This classification is based on the interpretation that such baby carriers are not integral parts of motor vehicles, similar to car covers which were held classifiable under 6307 90 by the CEGAT. The applicable GST rate is 5% when the sale value does not exceed Rs. 1,000 per piece, and 12% when it exceeds Rs. 1,000 per piece. – TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts Tax Management India – taxmanagementindia – taxmanagement – taxmanagementindia.com – TMI – TaxTMI – TMITax

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Case-Laws – GST – Highlights – E-commerce operator definition under GST Act examined. Applicant found to be owner of digital platform facilitating supply of services, qualifying as e-commerce operator. However, driver services supplied directly to customers, not 'through' applicant's platform as required u/s 9(5). Thus, applicant not liable to collect and pay GST on driver services, despite being an e-commerce operator. Conditions of Section 9(5) not met for tax liability on e-commerce operator. – TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts Tax Management India – taxmanagementindia – taxmanagement – taxmanagementindia.com – TMI – TaxTMI – TMITax

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Case-Laws – GST – Highlights – The Advance Ruling Authority rejected the application made by the applicant for pronouncement of ruling as the questions raised were not covered under any of the clauses of sub-section (2) of section 97 of the GST Act. The applicant had selected clause (b) of sub-section (2) of section 97 but failed to refer to any relevant notification during the hearing. Despite being given reasonable opportunity, the applicant did not raise questions covered under any clause of sub-section (2) of section 97. The application was rejected as the questions were found not to be covered under the scope of Advance Ruling application for interpretation of provisions of Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and West Bengal Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, or classification of goods and services for tax purposes. – TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts Tax Management India – taxmanagementindia – taxmanagement – taxmanagementindia.com – TMI – TaxTMI – TMITax

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Case-Laws – GST – Highlights – Penalty proceedings under CGST Act cannot be initiated after State GST Authorities have initiated proceedings on the same subject matter. Once proceedings are initiated u/ss 73 or 74, penalty proceedings u/s 122 are deemed concluded. The impugned show cause notice purporting u/s 122 of CGST Act, after initiation of proceedings by State GST Authorities, is illegal, arbitrary, without jurisdiction, and contrary to provisions of law, warranting court's interference to quash it. – TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts Tax Management India – taxmanagementindia – taxmanagement – taxmanagementindia.com – TMI – TaxTMI – TMITax

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Case-Laws – GST – Highlights – The petitioner sought restoration of its GST registration under the trade name 'Shri Salasar Balaji Steel'. The court directed the respondent authorities to confirm the petitioner's compliance with the Show Cause Notice and take necessary steps to restore its GST status without delay. As per Rule 86B of CGST/DGST Rules, a registered taxpayer cannot utilize input tax credit (ITC) from the electronic credit ledger to discharge its entire liability towards outward supplies, being limited to a maximum of 99%. The petitioner deposited Rs. 80,000/- to comply with the requirement of paying at least 1% of its liability on outward supplies. The court observed that suspension of GST registration has wide adverse ramifications for the taxpayer's business and can be undertaken only after due consideration. Since the only allegation in the Show Cause Notice was non-compliance with Rule 86B, which stands remedied by the deposit, the court allowed the petition and directed the respondents to forthwith restore the petitioner's GST registration. – TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts Tax Management India – taxmanagementindia – taxmanagement – taxmanagementindia.com – TMI – TaxTMI – TMITax

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Case-Laws – GST – Highlights – The High Court quashed the impugned order passed by the Deputy Commissioner, State Tax u/s 74 of the Uttar Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, citing violation of principles of natural justice. The Court relied on its coordinate Bench judgment in Mahaveer Trading Company, where it held that the self-imposed bar of alternative remedy cannot be applied in such cases, as the appeal authority lacks the power to remand proceedings. Considering the factual similarities, the Court directed the concerned officer to grant the petitioner an opportunity to file a fresh reply, conduct a hearing, and pass a reasoned order. – TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts Tax Management India – taxmanagementindia – taxmanagement – taxmanagementindia.com – TMI – TaxTMI – TMITax

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Case-Laws – GST – Highlights – Tax assessment order set aside due to defects in show cause notice, failure to consider Covid-19 impact on business operations. Taxpayer engaged in milk manufacturing faced stagnation of goods, requiring excess electricity consumption for storage despite low sales. Respondent failed to consider vital aspects explained by taxpayer regarding disparity between turnover and electricity units consumed. High Court remanded matter for reconsideration by respondent after finding violation of principles of natural justice by not considering taxpayer's reply and supporting documents adequately before alleging suppression of sales. – TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts Tax Management India – taxmanagementindia – taxmanagement – taxmanagementindia.com – TMI – TaxTMI – TMITax

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Case-Laws – GST – Highlights – The court quashed the impugned orders rejecting the appeal as the appellate authority failed to assign any reasons, violating principles of natural justice. It is settled law that reasons are the heartbeat of every conclusion, and an order without valid reasons cannot be sustained. Giving reasons substitutes subjectivity with objectivity. The Supreme Court has held that administrative authorities and tribunals are obliged to give reasons, absence of which renders the order liable to judicial scrutiny. As no reason was assigned for rejecting the appeal, the orders could not be sustained in the eyes of law. – TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts Tax Management India – taxmanagementindia – taxmanagement – taxmanagementindia.com – TMI – TaxTMI – TMITax

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Goods and Services Tax – GST Dated:- 3-10-2024 – News – Advisory: GSTN e-Services App to Replace e-Invoice QR Code Verifier App Shortly Dated:- 3-10-2024 – GSTN is pleased to inform the launch of the new GSTN e-Services app , which replaces the old e-Invoice QR Code Verifier App . This app offers the following features: Verify e-Invoices: Scan the QR code to verify the B2B e-Invoices QR code and check the live status of the Invoice Reference Number (IRN). GSTIN Search: Search for GSTIN detail

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Gross and Net GST revenue collections for the month of Sep, 2024 – Goods and Services Tax – GST Dated:- 3-10-2024 – News – Gross and Net GST revenue collections for the month of Sep, 2024 Dated:- 3-

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Case-Laws – GST – Highlights – The respondent resorted to profiteering by not passing on the benefit of GST rate reduction on cinema tickets, realizing an additional Rs. 4,65,549 from recipients. As per Rule 133, the respondent is directed to reduce ticket prices commensurate with the tax cut, deposit the profiteered amount of Rs. 4,65,549 plus 18% interest equally in central and state consumer welfare funds within 3 months. The respondent violated Section 171(1) by denying rate cut benefit, but penalty u/s 171(3A) cannot be imposed retrospectively. The jurisdictional GST commissioners are directed to monitor compliance and report to the commission within 4 months. – TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts Tax Management India – taxmanagementindia – taxmanagement – taxmanagementindia.com – TMI – TaxTMI – TMITax

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Case-Laws – GST – Highlights – The Respondent opted for GST at 5% without ITC as per Notification No. 03/2019-Central Tax (Rate) and reversed all available ITC pertaining to the financial years 2017-2018 and 2018-2019 from April 2019 onwards. The Respondent also reversed ITC availed due to delay in payments to suppliers beyond 180 days and excess ITC availed wrongly, resulting in negative credit during the post-GST period. The Respondent did not retain any ITC related to the 'Ireo Waterfront' project and reversed all ineligible ITC. Post-GST, no additional ITC benefit accrued to the Respondent for the 'Ireo Waterfront' project. Consequently, the provisions of Section 171(1) of the CGST Act, 2017 are not attracted, and the proceedings were dropped. – TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts Tax Management India – taxmanagementindia – taxmanagement – taxmanagementindia.com – TMI – TaxTMI – TMITax

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Case-Laws – GST – Highlights – The High Court upheld the validity of the impugned order u/s 107(11) of the Karnataka Goods and Services Act, 2017. The petitioner's contention that the adjudicating authority erred by not taking action against the supplier and ignoring tax invoices and tax payments was rejected. The court held that the purchasing dealer must prove the actual physical movement of goods unless purchased from respective dealers. Failure to establish this aspect justifies rejection of Input Tax Credit (ITC) claims by the assessing officer, as per the Supreme Court's judgment in The State of Karnataka v. M/s Ecom Gill Coffee Trading Private Limited. Although the petitioner produced documents showing the supplier's existence and business continuity, the vehicles transporting the goods were not traced and appeared fraudulent. Section 16(2)(c)(d) was applicable, and the burden of proving ITC eligibility lies on the purchaser u/s 155. The revenue can recover tax from the purchaser if the supplier failed to pay. The appellate authority rightly confirmed the order rejecting the petitioner's ITC claim. The High Court found no malice, arbitrariness, or illegality in the order and dismissed the writ petition. – TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts Tax Management India – taxmanagementindia – taxmanagement – taxmanagementindia.com – TMI – TaxTMI – TMITax

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Case-Laws – GST – Highlights – The High Court set aside the impugned order of adjudication and remitted the matter back to the respondent for fresh consideration. The appeal was dismissed on the ground of time limitation. However, the Court held that if an appeal is dismissed on the ground of delay as barred by limitation, it is not considered an appeal in the eyes of law, and there would be no merger of the original order into the order of the Appellate Authority. Therefore, the High Court can exercise its jurisdiction under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution. The mere dismissal of the appeal by the Appellate Authority on the ground of limitation does not preclude the High Court from exercising its jurisdiction. Consequently, the impugned order was set aside, and the matter was remanded for fresh consideration. – TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts Tax Management India – taxmanagementindia – taxmanagement – taxmanagementindia.com – TMI – TaxTMI – TMITax

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Case-Laws – GST – Highlights – The High Court held that the issues raised by the petitioner regarding the reasons for transporting goods in a different vehicle and the expiry of the e-way bill should have been considered by the competent authorities before imposing a penalty u/s 129 of the CGST/SGST Acts. If there was no attempt to evade tax and the discrepancies were beyond the petitioner's control, this should have been considered by the original and Appellate Authorities. Although the petitioner may be justified in challenging the Appellate Authority's order due to the non-constitution of the Tribunal u/s 112, the High Court may not entertain the challenge in a writ petition under Article 226 since adjudication involves disputed questions of fact. The appeal filed by the petitioner is restored to the Appellate Authority, who shall pass fresh orders after affording a further opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. The order is quashed. – TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts Tax Management India – taxmanagementindia – taxmanagement – taxmanagementindia.com – TMI – TaxTMI – TMITax

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Case-Laws – GST – Highlights – GST levy on annuity received by petitioner – dispute on timing of liability. Authorities viewed liability arising from concession period commencement date, considering annuity for road maintenance. Petitioner disagreed. CBIC circular clarified tax payable on invoice issuance or annuity receipt, whichever earlier. HC set aside orders, directing authorities to collect tax per CBIC circular. – TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts Tax Management India – taxmanagementindia – taxmanagement – taxmanagementindia.com – TMI – TaxTMI – TMITax

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Case-Laws – GST – Highlights – The petitioner was exempt from paying GST on the supply of cotton seed oil cake under Entry No. 102 of Notification No. 2/2017, as it qualifies as cattle feed. The pre-GST VAT regime also exempted cotton seed oil cake as cattle feed. The respondent Authority's objections, based on the Audit Party's findings that the petitioner could not prove the purchasers' status, are irrelevant as the end-use as cattle feed is undisputed. The Supreme Court has held that the end-use of a product by the purchaser is not a concern for the assessee in classifying goods. Therefore, the petitioner is entitled to the exemption for supplying cotton seed oil cake as cattle feed under the GST Act. The High Court quashed the impugned orders denying the exemption and allowed the petition. – TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts Tax Management India – taxmanagementindia – taxmanagement – taxmanagementindia.com – TMI – TaxTMI – TMITax

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =