Author: admin_gst

Goods seized for lacking e-way bill despite tax compliance; High Court quashes order citing no tax evasion intent.
Case-Laws
GST
Non-generation of e-way bill during transportation of goods led to seizure order u/s 129(3) of GST Act, imposing penalty and interest. However, it was admitted that goods were transported with relevant documents except e-way bill, which was produced before seizure order. No finding recorded regarding intention to evade tax. Relying on precedent, High Court hel

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Halwa branded by applicant classified as “sweetmeat” under GST, not “namkeen” despite same HSN code.
Case-Laws
GST
Packed halwa purchased from an outsourced manufacturer and marketed under the applicant's brand name is classifiable under HSN Code 2106 90 as “sweetmeats” and taxable at 2.5% CGST under Entry No. 101 of Schedule I of Notification No. 1/2017 Central Tax (Rate), dated 28-06-2017. Despite the same HSN 2106 90 appearing in Schedule II covering “Namkeens,” when a specific item

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Contractor retains control, services classified as leasing/rental without operator; 18% GST applicable.
Case-Laws
GST
The applicant's services do not constitute a transfer of the right to use goods, as substantial control remains with the contractor and is not handed over to the user. The contracts in question are leasing or rental services without an operator, falling under Sl. No. 17 (viii) of Notification No. 11/2017 Central Tax (Rate) dated 28-06-2017. Such services attract GST at t

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Pre-packed Ready-to-Eat Items Classified Under HSN 2004 10 10 Due to Cooking and Retort Preservation Processes.
Case-Laws
GST
The process involved in preparing pre-packed ready-to-eat items is not merely cooking but also includes preservation through retort technology. The appropriate classification for these items is under HSN 2004 10 10, as both preparation and preservation are applicable. According to the rules for interpretation of the Tariff, when goods cannot be classified by refe

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Ride-hailing app liable for GST on transportation services facilitated through its platform.
Case-Laws
GST
The e-commerce operator's nature of supply is conceptualized u/s 9(5) of the CGST Act, 2017, read with Notification No. 17/2017. The operator is liable to collect and pay GST on the supply of services provided by drivers/service providers to customers identified on the platform, under the proposed business model. The applicant falls within the definition of an electronic commerce o

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Failure to Serve Notices Voids Tax Order; Case Remanded for Reconsideration Due to Violations of Natural Justice.
Case-Laws
GST
The petitioner was not served with notices/communications, resulting in their failure to file a reply within the stipulated time. As per the proviso to Rule 86B of the GST Rules, the petitioner is not liable to pay any tax amount. However, the petitioner, being unaware of the show cause notice, failed to appear for personal hearing before the respondent authori

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Reversal of ITC by GST authorities quashed for lack of personal hearing; remanded for fresh decision after hearing.
Case-Laws
GST
The High Court set aside the impugned order passed by the respondent in Form GST DRC-07, reversing the ITC availed by the petitioner. The respondent had passed the order without affording an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner, violating Section 75(4) of the CGST Act and principles of natural justice. The matter was remanded to the respondent fo

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Court Overturns Assessment Order for Violating Natural Justice; Allows Reconsideration of ITC Claims and Tax Liability.
Case-Laws
GST
The court found merit in the petitioner's submission that the impugned order of assessment violated principles of natural justice by traversing beyond the show cause notice, denying the petitioner an opportunity to present their case. Regarding the discrepancy between GSTR-2A and GSTR-3B, the court held that the order proceeded without considering the pet

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Court Finds Breach in Tax Order Service, Sets Aside Order; Petitioner Must Deposit 25% Disputed Tax Within 2 Weeks.
Case-Laws
GST
The High Court addressed the violation of principles of natural justice. The impugned order of assessment was not properly served on the petitioner, as it was merely uploaded on the common portal instead of being tendered or sent via RPAD. Consequently, the impugned order was set aside. The petitioner was directed to deposit 25% of the disputed tax within two

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Tax Penalty Order Remanded: Court Rejects Denial Based on Clarification, Seeks Fresh Order.
Case-Laws
GST
The High Court held that the denial by the respondents to apply Section 129(1)(a) of the CGST/IGST Act based on the clarification dated 31.12.2018 and previous judgments was unjustified. The finding of the authority in Para-4 of its order was essentially factual and solely based on communication from CGST, Delhi regarding initiation of cancellation proceedings, without any evidence

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Unfair adjudication quashed; hearing opportunity denied. HC directs fresh probe upholding natural justice.
Case-Laws
GST
Order quashed due to violation of principles of natural justice. Petitioner not afforded opportunity of hearing after supply of documents. Directions issued by HC not followed. Finding on fraud allegation ipse dixit. Matter remanded to Joint Commissioner for fresh adjudication after providing opportunity of hearing, following HC directions, and dealing with fraud alle

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ADVISORY FOR WAIVER SCHEME UNDER SECTION 128A
GST
Dated:- 8-11-2024

For reducing the tax disputes and to provide a big relief to the taxpayers, GST Council in its 53rd meeting held on 22nd June, 2024 had recommended for waiver of interest and penalties in the demand notices or orders issued under Section 73 of the CGST Act, 2017 (i.e. the cases not involving fraud, suppression or wilful misstatement, etc.) for the Financial years 2017-18, 2018-19 and 2019-20. To avail this waiver, the condition is that the full tax demanded is paid on or before 31.03.2025.
In view of the above, Rule 164 of CGST rules, 2017 was notified through Notification No. 20/2024 dated. 8th October 2024, effective from 1st November 2024. This rule provid

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Advisory related to ‘Other Territory’ applications
GST
Dated:- 8-11-2024

Dear Taxpayers,
As per Notification No. 2/2017-Central Tax dated 19th June, 2017 read with Trade Notice No. 01/2017-Central Tax dated 21st June, 2017 issued by Office of the Chief Commissioner of Central Excise, Mumbai Zone I and GST Trade Notice No. 002/2017 dated 20th June, 2017 issued by Central Excise Zone, Chennai, the applicant applying for new registration application and selecting the category of 'Other Territory' in the tab of State/UT in Part-A of GST registration form, shall only be administered under 'Mumbai South' or 'Chennai North' Commissionerate's and shall select centre jurisdiction as follows:
1. For 'Other Territory' pertaining to

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Unfair GST registration cancellation order quashed; due process ordered for show cause notice.
Case-Laws
GST
GST registration cancellation order passed without providing reasons or opportunity for hearing, violating principles of natural justice. Appellate authority dismissed appeal without considering petitioner's submissions. High Court quashed cancellation order and appellate order, remanding matter to assessing officer for issuing show cause notice and following due process. Petitio

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Tax registration cancelled without hearing or reasons.
Case-Laws
GST
Order for cancellation of registration passed without providing opportunity of hearing or assigning reasons violates principles of natural justice. Coordinate Bench judgment held authorities should have considered transitional registration applications favorably during GST implementation. Despite directions, cryptic notice and order cancelling petitioner's registration issued without reasons. Appeal dismissed, precludi

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Court Confirms No Extensions Beyond Statutory Time Limits for GST Appeals Under Haryana GST Act 2017.
Case-Laws
GST
The High Court examined the issue of whether the Appellate Authority was legally correct in rejecting appeals filed beyond the time limit prescribed under the Haryana Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. It was found that while the petitioners had paid the pre-deposit for hearing the appeal, the appeals were admittedly filed beyond the limitation period, even exceeding the additional period of 30 days for condonation u/ss 107 and 35(1) of the Act. The provisions u/s 107 are not amenable to the Limitation Act, and the delay cannot be further condoned as the condonation is provided within the Act itself. Consequently, the

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Bail Granted for Wrongful Input Tax Credit Case Citing Custody Duration, Co-Accused Bail, and Right to Speedy Trial.
Case-Laws
GST
This is a judgment by the High Court granting regular bail to the petitioner accused of offenses u/ss 420, 467, 468, 471 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 132(1)(b) and (c) of the HGST Act, 2017, related to wrongful availment and utilization of Input Tax Credit (ITC). The court considered that the petitioner has already undergone substantial incarceration

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Petitioner granted bail after nearly a year, citing false implication and right to speedy trial; court stresses “bail is the rule.
Case-Laws
GST
Petitioner sought regular bail, contending false implication and non-impleadment of main accused. Petitioner underwent 11 months and 26 days of custody, with another case pending on bail. Charges framed u/ss 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC and Section 132 CGST Act, 2017. Court observed that out of 12 prosecution witnesses, only 3 examined till date, and

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Advisory for Form GST DRC-03A
GST
Dated:- 6-11-2024

1. It has been observed that some taxpayers have paid the demanded amount vide DRC 07/ DRC 08/ MOV 09/ MOV 11/ APL 04 through DRC-03 instead of using payment facility 'Payment towards demand' available on GST portal. This led to a situation where demand has been paid by the taxpayer, however the demand is not closed in the electronic liability register. To address this issue, the government has notified a new form named GST DRC-03A which was notified vide Notification No. 12/2024 dated. 10th July 2024.
2. Accordingly, GSTN has developed the new Form GST DRC-03A on GST portal which is available now to adjust the paid amount through DRC-03 against the corresponding demand orde

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Advisory: Time Limit for Reporting e-Invoice on the IRP Portal – Lowering of Threshold to AATO 10 Crores and Above
GST
Dated:- 6-11-2024

Dear Taxpayers,
1. With reference to the earlier advisory dated 13th September 2023 (https://einvoice.gst.gov.in/einvoice/newsandupdates/read-602), where a time limit of 30 days for reporting e-Invoices on IRP portals for taxpayers with an AATO of 100 crores and above was implemented, the threshold has now been lowered to cover taxpayers with an AATO of 10 crores and above.
2. Therefore, from 1st April 2025, taxpayers with an AATO of 10 crores and above would not be allowed to report e-Invoices older than 30 days from the date of reporting on IRP portals.
3. This restriction would apply

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Court lifts freezing of account; gives chance to reply to tax notice.
Case-Laws
GST
Interim order by High Court lifting attachment on petitioner's bank account pending final disposal, allowing petitioner opportunity to respond to demand notice issued under CGST Act. Court refrains from opining on merits, directs petitioner to appear before respondent authority on specified date for further proceedings in accordance with law. Petition disposed of.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick note

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Court Allows Input Tax Credit Claims for 2017-2021 Due to Covid-19 Force Majeure, Sets New Conditions for Future Claims.
Case-Laws
GST
The High Court addressed the extension of due dates u/s 73 of the CGST/AGST Act, 2017 due to the Covid-19 pandemic. It examined the provisions related to the time limit prescribed u/s 73 and the invocation of Section 168A, considering the “force majeure” condition. The Court observed that, notwithstanding Section 16(4), for financial years 2017-18 to 202

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Court Invalidates Tax Order, Remands Case for Review Amid Retrospective Amendments; Input Tax Credit Claims Revived.
Case-Laws
GST
The High Court addressed the challenge to notifications extending the time limit for issuance of orders u/s 73 of the CGST/AGST Act, 2017, due to the “force majeure” condition of Covid-19. The Court noted that amendments introduced by the Finance (No. 2) Act, 2024, retrospectively effective from 01.07.2017, allowed registered persons to claim input tax credi

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Taxpayer wins right to claim input tax credit after 2024 retrospective amendments.
Case-Laws
GST
The Court held that due to amendments brought in by the Finance (No. 2) Act, 2024, the registered person is entitled to avail input tax credit for the relevant period subject to conditions prescribed under newly inserted Sections 16(5) and 16(6) of the CGST Act, 2017. The amendments, given retrospective effect from 01.07.2017, rendered the proceedings initiated against the petitioner through

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Movie theaters hiked ticket prices to offset GST cut – profiteering charges upheld.
Case-Laws
GST
Profiteering in GST rates for admission to cinema exhibitions. Despite a reduction in GST rates from 28% to 18%, the benefit was not passed on to consumers, and instead, the base price was increased to maintain a uniform “cum-tax” selling price. The High Court held that once the GST rate was reduced, it became mandatory for the petitioner to pass on the benefit of that reduction. There was

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =