Author: admin_gst

High Court Quashes Orders Exceeding U.P.G.S.T. Act Time Limits; Orders De-freezing of Petitioner's Accounts.
Case-Laws
GST
The case pertains to the jurisdiction of impugned orders under the U.P.G.S.T. Act, 2017, and the time limitation u/s 73 and Section 44 of the Act. The key points are: the retrospective effect of notifications, the time limit prescribed for issuing orders u/s 73(9) based on the due date of filing annual returns u/s 44(1), and the validity of the impugned orders in li

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Court Upholds GST Audit Notice for De-Registered Entity; Highlights Compliance Post De-Registration.
Case-Laws
GST
The High Court dismissed the writ petition challenging the notice issued u/s 65 of the Maharashtra Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 for conducting an audit for the financial year 2020-21, even though the petitioner had ceased to be registered on the date of ordering the audit. The Court held that the provisions of Section 65 dealing with audit would apply to a person who wa

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Important advisory on GSTR 2B and IMS
GST
Dated:- 19-11-2024

1. It has been reported by few taxpayers that their GSTR-2B for October-2024 period has not been generated on 14th November, 2024. In this regard it to be informed that as per the design of IMS, GSTR-2B will not be generated by the system in below scenarios:
i. In case the taxpayer has opted for QRMP scheme (Quarterly filers), GSTR-2B will not be generated for first and second month of the quarter. Ex. For quarter Oct-Dec, 2024, the quarterly taxpayer will get GSTR-2B for December-2024 period only and not for October-2024 & November-2024.
ii. In case the taxpayer has not filed their previous period GSTR-3B, GSTR-2B will not be generated by the system. Such taxpay

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Disputed GST assessment order annulled; 25% tax deposit required; objections permitted.
Case-Laws
GST
Challenge to assessment order and rectification order for assessment year 2018-19 – mismatch between GSTR-3B and GSTR-2A/GSTR-2B – order challenged on grounds of non-service through tendering or registered post, violating principles of natural justice – impugned order set aside – petitioner directed to deposit 25% of disputed tax as per rectification order within 4 weeks – on compliance

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Apex Court upholds validity of extension of GST annual return filing date & dismisses writ against Show Cause Notice.
Case-Laws
GST
Extension of time limits for filing annual returns under GST Acts was valid. Show Cause Notice issued within extended time limit u/s 73(9) of CGST/AGST Act for FY 2017-18 was upheld. Writ petition was dismissed as statutory appeal remedy u/s 107 of CGST/AGST Act was available against the Order-in-Original passed by the Adjudicating Authority. Principles of

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Excessive tax liability determination in final order vs show cause notice allegations violates law.
Case-Laws
GST
The High Court held that the final assessment order passed by the authority exceeded the scope of the show cause notice by determining a higher tax liability than alleged in the notice. This violated Section 75(7) of the Act, which mandates that the final order cannot travel beyond the allegations in the show cause notice. Consequently, the High Court set aside the impugned

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Taxpayer wins case over GST demand orders hidden on portal.
Case-Laws
GST
Petitioner challenged order u/s 73 of GST Act creating demand, as notices were uploaded on GST portal's 'Additional Notices and Orders' tab, unbeknownst to petitioner who couldn't appear or question orders within limitation period. Referring to OLA FLEET case, where impugned order wasn't reflected under 'View Notices and Orders' tab and assessee's replies weren't considered, High Court quashed impugned orders date

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Natural Antioxidant Water classified under HSN 2202 1090 for flavored goods with sweeteners; subject to 28% tax and 12% cess.
Case-Laws
GST
Natural Antioxidant Water with natural Betel Leaf extract and natural Ajwain extract cannot be classified under HSN 2202 9920 as it does not contain any fruit juice or fruit pulp. The product is essentially 'Paan flavored water' with menthol crystals dissolved in propylene glycol as a flavoring additive. It is not classifiable under HSN 2201 1010 du

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

New CGST provision on input tax credit for 2018-19 invoices submitted before Nov 2021.
Case-Laws
GST
Amendment to Central Goods and Services Tax (CGST) Act, 2017 introduced sub-section (5) in Section 16 regarding input tax credit. Petitioner submitted invoice/debit note for financial year 2018-19 prior to November 30, 2021, falling under the purview of sub-section (5). High Court directed respondent authorities to consider the matter and pass appropriate order considering the provision

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Penalty Reduced for Technical E-Way Bill Violation; No Tax Evasion Intent Found; Original Rs. 11,08,150 Penalty Cut to Rs. 25,000.
Case-Laws
GST
Challenge to penalty order u/s 129(1) of CGST Act for non-generation of Part-B of E-way bill. Petitioner accepted notice and paid Rs. 11,08,150 penalty voluntarily without objection. Respondent justified in passing penalty order for violating Section 129(1). However, petitioner had no intention of tax evasion, transporting goods from port after

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Petitioner's appeal dismissed for procedural lapses, but order quashed over respondent's verification failure. Fresh consideration ordered.
Case-Laws
GST
The court dismissed the petitioner's appeal due to non-compliance with statutory requirements, specifically the failure to submit valid proof of payment of the mandatory pre-deposit and the absence of valid documents establishing the petitioner's authority as an authorized signatory under the Companies Act. However, the court found tha

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Cancelled GST registration revived on filing pending returns, paying dues.
Case-Laws
GST
Proviso to sub-rule (4) of Rule 22 of CGST Rules 2017 allows revocation of GST registration cancellation u/s 29(2)(c) of CGST Act 2017 if pending returns are filed and tax, interest and late fees paid. Petitioner's GST registration was cancelled for non-filing returns for 6 months. High Court set aside cancellation order, directing petitioner to approach authority within 1 month for revocation upon

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Delayed GST refund interest payable from 60 days after shipping bill till actual refund, despite interim red-flagging.
Case-Laws
GST
Interest on delayed refund of tax u/s 56 of Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 is payable from expiry of 60 days from date of filing shipping bill till date of actual refund, irrespective of any interim period where assessee's name was red-flagged on department's portal. Section 56 provides for period of interest payment, commencing from date of rece

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Dismissal of petition against tax recovery notice; adjudication on suppression, misstatement facts reserved for later stage.
Case-Laws
GST
Entertainability of petition challenging show cause notice for recovery of taxes, determination of value of supply u/s 15(3)(b) of CGST Act. Allegations of suppressing facts, misstatement regarding non-furnishing outward supplies u/s 37, intention to evade GST from July 2017 to March 2022. Invocation of extended period of limitation based on suppress

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Court Upholds Fair Hearing Requirement for Challenging CGST and KGST Act's Section 16(4) Validity.
Case-Laws
GST
The Karnataka High Court disposed of the petition challenging the constitutional validity of Section 16(4) of the CGST and KGST Act, 2017, which was alleged to be violative of Articles 14, 19(1)(g), and 300A of the Constitution. The Court relied on its previous judgment in M/s. Sadhana Enviro Engineering Services vs. Joint Commissioner of Central Tax & others, where it held t

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Unlawful GST registration cancellation obstructed business rights; due process violated. Court orders fair hearing.
Case-Laws
GST
Cancellation of GST registration violated petitioner's constitutional right to carry on business. Respondent should have initiated legal action for alleged fraud instead of outright cancellation, depriving petitioner from conducting business. Suspension order passed without considering petitioner's reply, rendering proceedings liable to be set aside. High Cou

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Court Invalidates Hold on GST Refund Sanction Order; Authority's Input Tax Credit Concerns Deemed Irrelevant.
Case-Laws
GST
The High Court held that the revisional authority's order placing the refund sanction order in abeyance u/s 108 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 was invalid. Section 54 prescribes the procedure for claiming refunds, and the proviso to Section 54(1) requires following the procedure u/s 49(6) for refunds from the Electronic Cash Ledger. While Section 5

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Registration cancelled for not filing returns; court follows previous TVL case, allows revocation with conditions.
Case-Laws
GST
The High Court addressed the issue of cancellation of registration due to non-filing of statutory returns. The court relied on its previous decision in TVL. Suguna Cutpiece Center v. The Appellate Deputy Commissioner (ST) (GST), where it had directed revocation of registration under similar circumstances, subject to certain conditions. Consequently, the court

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

High Court Reverses GST Registration Cancellation; Case Sent Back for Reconsideration Due to Justice Violation.
Case-Laws
GST
The High Court set aside the order cancelling the petitioner's GST registration effective July 31, 2021, on grounds of violation of principles of natural justice. Despite issuance of show cause notices on August 26, 2022 and December 1, 2022, the petitioner's registration had already been cancelled by that time. The petitioner claimed non-receipt of notices, and

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Rule 86A of GST Rules Unconstitutional: Court Cites Breach of Natural Justice and Absence of Pre-decisional Hearing.
Case-Laws
GST
Rule 86A of the Central/State Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017, which allows blocking of the Electronic Credit Ledger, has been held unconstitutional by the High Court due to violation of principles of natural justice. The Court observed that no pre-decisional hearing was provided to the petitioner, and the impugned order lacked independent or cogent reaso

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Advisory on IMS on Supplier View
GST
Dated:- 13-11-2024

1. Invoice Management System (IMS) has been made available on the GST Portal from 14th October, 2024 wherein the recipient taxpayer can accept, reject or keep the invoices pending which are saved/filed by their suppliers in their respective GSTR-1/1A/IFF. This is to further inform you that the first GSTR-2B on the basis of such actions taken in IMS by the recipient taxpayers will be generated on 14th November, 2024 for October-2024 period.
2. To further facilitate the taxpayers, the Supplier View of IMS has also been made available where the action taken by their recipients on the records/invoices reported in GSTR-1/1A/IFF, will be visible to the suppliers in 'Supplier V

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Tax Credit Dispute: Court Orders ITC Unblocking & Release Per Prior Ruling.
Case-Laws
GST
The court held that the issue in controversy regarding the legality of sub-section (4) to Section 16 of the Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 and the Karnataka Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017, concerning the date of availment of input tax credit (ITC) in the books of account of the petitioner, is directly and squarely covered by its previous judgment in M/s. Sadhana Enviro Engineering Service

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Court Overturns Order Blocking E-Credit Ledger Due to Lack of Hearing and Justification, Violating Natural Justice.
Case-Laws
GST
The court quashed the order blocking the Electronic Credit Ledger (ECL) of the petitioner u/r 86A of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017. The respondents did not provide a pre-decisional hearing to the petitioner, nor did the impugned order contain cogent reasons to believe that blocking the ECL was necessary, violating principles of natural justic

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Court Quashes FIR on Online Betting Case Due to Lack of Evidence of Deception and Dishonest Intent from the Start.
Case-Laws
GST
Interpretation of Sections 415 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and Section 66D of the Information Technology Act, 2000, in the context of online betting. The court held that for an offence u/s 415 (cheating) to be punishable u/s 420, there must be a person who has been deceived from the inception with a dishonest intention to commit fraud. The court fou

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Land purchase, construction GST credit restricted; SC upholds CGST Act provisions.
Case-Laws
GST
Section 17(5)(c) and (d) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, which restricts input tax credit on GST paid for purchase of land and construction thereon, has been upheld by the Supreme Court. The petitioner sought to claim input tax credit on GST paid for land purchase and construction. However, the issue is no longer res integra and is covered by the Supreme Court's decision in

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =