Author: admin_gst

Tax liability for 2018-19 upheld; excuses rejected, appeals bypassed. Ignorance no defense for private firm.
Case-Laws
GST
Writ petition challenging order u/s 73 of WBGST/CGST Act for tax period April 2018 to March 2019 dismissed. Court found petitioner's contention of consultant's unavailability unconvincing for not responding to pre-show cause and show cause notices. As a private limited company, petitioner cannot feign ignorance. Petitioner failed to avail statutory remedy of appeal

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST Exemption Under Entry 3B Inapplicable for Works Contract Services to Local Authorities.
Case-Laws
GST
This is a case regarding the applicability of GST exemption under Entry 3B of Notification No. 13/2017-CT (Rate) dated 28.06.2017 for services provided by the applicant to a local authority. The key points are: The applicant is engaged in providing 'works contract services' involving supply of goods along with services for an immovable property to Kotputli Municipal Council, a local

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Tax registration revoked for not filing returns; Court grants relief to restart business on clearing dues.
Case-Laws
GST
Registration cancellation under WB GST/CGST Act due to non-filing of returns. Appeal rejected as time-barred u/s 107(4). Court observed petitioner's case did not involve tax evasion or dubious activities. Suspension/revocation would be counterproductive, impacting revenue recovery as petitioner cannot raise invoices or carry on business. Respondents directed to take p

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Writ Petition Allowed: Company Wins Against GST Demand on MD's Guarantees & Intra-Group Loans.
Case-Laws
GST
This case pertains to the liability of an appellant to pay Goods and Services Tax (GST) on a reverse charge basis for two specific services: supply of services by the Managing Director through personal guarantees on loans obtained by the company, and supply of services by extending loans from the petitioner-company to its subsidiary. The High Court held that Circular No. 204/16/2

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Unfair tax assessment order quashed for lack of notice; authorities to re-evaluate after fair hearing.
Case-Laws
GST
Assessment order quashed due to violation of principles of natural justice

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST authority's order quashed for violating natural justice; petitioner to get personal hearing.
Case-Laws
GST
The court held that the impugned order was passed in violation of principles of natural justice as no opportunity of personal hearing was provided to the petitioner prior to passing the order, contrary to Section 75(4) of the GST Act. The court directed the respondent authority to consider the petitioner's replies, issue a 14-day notice for personal hearing, and pass appropriat

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Bank account unfrozen, tax dispute reopened after lack of fair hearing.
Case-Laws
GST
Bank attachment order set aside due to lack of opportunity for personal hearing, violating natural justic

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Tax liability of Rs 38,361 upheld for availing fake input tax credit; Appeal remedy available.
Case-Laws
GST
Petitioner challenged ex-parte order demanding tax liability of Rs. 38,361/- including penalty and interest for wrongful availment of input tax credit on fake invoices. Court found no infirmity in impugned order passed after providing opportunity to petitioner. Petitioner has efficacious appeal remedy u/s 107, without exhausting which writ petition is not maintainable. Writ petit

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Registration Cancelled, Remedy Bypassed – Amnesty Scheme Missed.
Case-Laws
GST
Cancellation of petitioner's registration occurred without availing appellate remedy or Amnesty Scheme. SCN not produced in writ petition, nor averment of non-receipt, violating principles of natural justice. Section 30 of GST Act allows application for revocation within thirty days. Government issued Amnesty Scheme Circular No. 3 of 2023 permitting restoration of cancelled registrations on payment of dues be

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST Registration Revocation Challenged Over Door Number Discrepancy – Court Revokes Cancellation Upon Satisfactory Explanation.
Case-Laws
GST
Petitioner challenged the rejection of application for revocation of cancellation of GST registration due to discrepancies in the door number of business premises. Court, satisfied with petitioner's explanation regarding door number discrepancy, revoked cancellation of GST registration. Impugned order dated 16.08.2024 and cancellation order dated

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Petitioner wins Rs. 32.29L VAT input tax refund sans application after Rs. 5.38Cr refund under old Act.
Case-Laws
GST
Transitional credit of input tax available under VAT Act sought. State contended refund application pursuant to Annexure-P/15 required. Court held refund of Rs. 5,38,20,214/- sanctioned payable to petitioner unrelated to input tax sought for transitional credit in GST period. Rs. 32,29,195/- withheld due to additional demand, would have been forfeited if input tax claim

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Two-wheeler seat GST dispute: Misclassification led to tax liability. Petitioner to forgo refund claim for Rs. 1.25 billion if notices split for AMNESTY scheme.
Case-Laws
GST
GST dispute involving misclassification of two-wheeler seats – petitioner challenged bunching of show cause notices for multiple assessment years – HC allowed splitting notices for separate years to avail proposed AMNESTY scheme – petitioner agreed not to claim refund of Rs. 1,24,74,14,950 deposited as tax liabilit

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Tax authorities' orders quashed for violating natural justice over GST return mistake.
Case-Laws
GST
The High Court quashed the orders issued by the tax authorities after scrutiny of GST returns u/s 61, as the principles of natural justice were violated by not providing an opportunity of hearing. The petitioner inadvertently claimed input tax credit under the wrong column in GSTR-3B, which was clarified through a reply, but the authorities failed to consider it before passing the orders

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Tax notice challenged, adjudication ordered on interest liability for delayed GST filing.
Case-Laws
GST
Writ petition challenging notice for failure to file GST returns on time and consequential recovery notice. Court held petitioner should have sought mandamus for adjudication on liability for interest u/s 50 of CGST/TNGST Act. Petition disposed directing respondents to pass fresh order on merits within three months, justifying interest payable when amounts credited to government's ele

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Valuation of service supply to state govt, tax rate, and goods % in composite supply under Notification 2/2018.
Case-Laws
GST
Dispute concerning value of supply of services by petitioner company to state government, rate of tax applicable, and components included in calculating percentage of goods value in composite supply under Notification 2/2018-Central Tax (Rate). Court granted interim protection to petitioner, allowing response to show cause within 30 days, considering prima facie

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Revised advisory issued – Hard – Locking of auto-populated liability in GSTR-3B
GST
Dated:- 18-10-2024

1. In order to assist taxpayers in filing their returns and minimizing human errors, GSTN has continuously improving the GST return filing process and in this endeavor the GST Portal now provides a pre-filled GSTR-3B form, where the tax liability is auto-populated from the declared supplies in GSTR-1/ GSTR-1A/ IFF by the supplier, while the Input Tax Credit (ITC) is auto-populated from GSTR-2B. A detailed system generated pdf of the auto populated GSTR-3B is also provided to all the taxpayers.
2. Now, taxpayers also have a facility to amend their incorrectly declared outward supplies in GSTR-1/IFF through GSTR-1A, allowing t

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Additional FAQs on IMS
GST
Dated:- 18-10-2024

Invoice Management System (IMS) is now available to taxpayers. This new system shall facilitate taxpayers in matching their records/invoices vis a vis issued by their suppliers for availing the correct Input Tax Credit (ITC). Taxpayers can now make use of this facility to seamlessly accept, reject, or keep invoices pending in the system to avail later as and when required. The first GSTR-2B on the basis of actions taken in IMS would be generated for the return period Oct'24 on 14th November, 2024. For some additional frequently asked questions (FAQs) on IMS to get a better understanding of the new functionality.
Thanking You,
Team GSTN
Additional FAQ on IMS
1
Which invoices are visible on IMS dashboard since 14th Oct 2024?
IMS is launched from GSTR-2B return period of Oct'24. Hence, all the records eligible for GSTR-2B of Oct'24 return period onwards will be made available on the IMS dashboard. All the invoices which

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

When should an invoice/debit note be rejected?
Rejection of an invoice/debit note should be done very carefully as rejection will result in no ITC for the recipient.
A record may be rejected if it does not pertain to the recipient, or the detail of the record is erroneous to such an extent that CN and DN cannot handle the situation.
6
In light of the time limit to avail ITC being till 30th November for FY 2023-24 or furnishing of annual return whichever is earlier, how can the ITC of erroneously rejected invoice in IMS, be taken by the recipient in the FY 2023-24?
In case the recipient taxpayer erroneously rejects an invoice in IMS, then the same invoice can be accepted in IMS again before filing of GSTR 3B.
After accepting the said invoice, the recipient taxpayer should recompute the updated GSTR-2B for availing the credit in GSTR 3B for the FY 2023-24.
7
How can recipient accept a genuine credit note issued by supplier in IMS as it will result further reduction of t

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ejected by the recipient?
In the absence of linkage of Credit Note with the corresponding invoices, system cannot understand whether original invoice for this Credit Note was accepted or rejected.
Therefore, if the invoice is not correct, then it is advisable to rectify the mistake through amendment of invoices in the GSTR 1 instead of issuance of a Credit Note.
10
Can the Credit Note be kept as pending in IMS? If no, then why?
Credit Note cannot be kept pending in the IMS by the recipient as the supplier has reduced its outward tax liability at the time of issuance of credit note.
IMS does not change the existing flow where the documents/records reported by the supplier in the GSTR 1 is accepted and corresponding impact is reflected in the GSTR-2B. Now because of IMS, an additional option has been provided to recipient to reject the credit note if it does not belong to him.
11
Whether liability can be added in the same GSTR 3B in case where credit note has been rejecte

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Sewerage System Works to Local Authority Attracts GST Despite Entry 3B Exemption.
Case-Laws
GST
Composite supply involving works contract services provided to local authority not exempt under GST. Entry 3B of Notification No. 13/2017-CT(Rate) exempting services to government authority not applicable as applicant providing works contract services with supply of goods exceeding 25% value. Entries 3, 3A and 3B interlinked, exemption limited to pure services or composite supply with goods v

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Case-Laws – GST – Highlights – The authority classified the product “Vanilla Mix” – dried softy ice cream mix (low fat) in vanilla flavour under Heading 2106 90 99 of the First Schedule to the Tariff Act, attracting tax at 9% CGST and 9% SGST. It held that the product, comprising several ingredients intended for making soft serves, does not fall under Heading 0404 as a dairy produce. As per Chapter Note 5, food preparations subjected to further processing for human consumption are covered under Heading 2106, which includes powders for ice-creams, preparations consisting of milk powder, sugar and other added ingredients, and powders for table cream, jellies, ice-cream and similar preparations. – 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

= = = = = = = =

Vanilla Ice Cream Mix Classified for Tax Duty Under Food Preparations, Not Dairy Produce.
Case-Laws
GST
The authority classified the product “Vanilla Mix” – dried softy ice cream mix (low fat) in vanilla flavour under Heading 2106 90 99 of the First Schedule to the Tariff Act, attracting tax at 9% CGST and 9% SGST. It held that the product, comprising several ingredients intended for making soft serves, does not fall under Heading 0404 as a dairy produce. As per Chapter Note 5, food pre

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Classifying supply as works contract. Eligibility for input tax credit on materials, labor, installation, overheads under contract execution modes.
Case-Laws
GST
Supply classified as works contract u/s 2(119) of CGST Act. Applicant executes deposit works on behalf of consumers/agencies under two modes. In second mode, applicant eligible for input tax credit on materials, labor, installation, and overheads as per Section 16, not blocked u/s 17(5). Ownership vests with applicant after con

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Authority can issue second notice for additional GST discrepancies after initial explanation.
Case-Laws
GST
The High Court held that the respondent-authority had jurisdiction u/s 61 of the Jharkhand Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 to issue a second show-cause notice seeking further explanation regarding discrepancies pointed out after the petitioner's response to the first show-cause notice. The Court opined that since the petitioner had furnished an explanation to the first notice, no

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Petitioner's tax recovery during investigation before notice illegal; refund ordered.
Case-Laws
GST
The High Court held that the petitioner's contention of not having the power to recover amounts during the pendency of an investigation that commenced prior to the issuance of a show cause notice u/ss 67 and 70 is valid. The payments made by the petitioner cannot be considered self-ascertainment u/s 74(5) of the CGST Act, as the element of voluntariness is absent. Since the adjudication i

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Blocking Credit Ledger Without Hearing Violates Natural Justice; Court Quashes Illegal Order, Cites Rule 86A Breach.
Case-Laws
GST
The court held that blocking of the Electronic Credit Ledger without providing a pre-decisional hearing to the petitioner and without containing cogent reasons to believe in the impugned order violated the principles of natural justice. Relying on the precedent of K-9-ENTERPRISES, KWALITY METALS, K-9-INDUSTRIES VERSUS THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, THE ASSISTANT CO

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Mastermind nabbed for Rs. 175 cr GST fraud via fake invoices; bail nixed due to economic offence & flight risk.
Case-Laws
GST
Bail cancellation case involving fraudulent input tax credit and creation of fake invoices under GST Act. Court found no procedural lapses by authorities in arrest as summons were issued, reasons recorded, and arrest memo provided. Accused was mastermind causing Rs. 175.88 crore tax evasion. Risk of fleeing abroad and tampering evidence if granted bail. Bail canc

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =