Author: admin_gst

Cryptic notice, arbitrary suspension of registration flouts natural justice.
Case-Laws
GST
Cryptic show-cause notice and suspension of registration without assigning adequate reasons violates principles of natural justice. Authorities should not pass orders mechanically without providing basic reasons, depriving the aggrieved party of an effective opportunity to respond. The impugned show-cause notice dated 27.01.2024 and the order suspending registration are set aside due to lack of pr

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Taxpayer's double taxation woes end as court rules against reverse charge GST liability.
Case-Laws
GST
The court held that the petitioner cannot be made liable to pay GST under the reverse charge mechanism if it would lead to double taxation, provided the entire tax amount has been discharged. The court relied on its previous decision, wherein it was held that if the tax has reached the government's coffers, the assessee cannot be made to pay double tax merely due to non-adherence to th

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Non-speaking assessment order passed without considering objections; violated principles of natural justice. Revenue to re-do assessment.
Case-Laws
GST
Challenge to non-speaking order of assessment and consequential rectification order. Order passed without considering objections, violating principles of natural justice. Revenue agreed to re-do assessment. High Court set aside assessment order, treating it as show cause notice. Petitioner to appear before Revenue, submit objections and

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

High Court quashes tax order due to improper dismissal of appeal on limitation and pre-deposit grounds.
Case-Laws
GST
The High Court quashed the order of adjudication passed u/s 74 and demand notice u/s 107 of the KGST/CGST Act. It held that the appellate authority erred in dismissing the appeal on the grounds of limitation and non-payment of 10% pre-deposit. The appeal was filed within the prescribed time limit, and the affidavit for condonation of delay was not considered. The matter

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Court Quashes GST Registration Cancellation for Lack of Justification; Emphasizes Need for Reasoned Orders.
Case-Laws
GST
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 de

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Court Sets Aside Orders for Lack of Proper Notice and Hearing Under State GST Act, Violating Sections 73, 75, and Rule 142.
Case-Laws
GST
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

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Court Invalidates IGST Demand on Reinsurance Services; Amendments Regularized Tax Period, Petition Granted.
Case-Laws
GST
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

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST Appeal Deadline Upheld: Courts Reject Extension Beyond Prescribed Period for Post-March Orders.
Case-Laws
GST
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 Ya

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Supreme Court Clarifies GST Act: Works Contract Excluded from ITC; Defines “Plant or Machinery” for Business Use.
Case-Laws
GST
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

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Transforming Second-Hand Jewelry into New Pieces Qualifies as Manufacturing, Affects GST Margin Rule Application.
Case-Laws
GST
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 (diffe

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Interest charges on loans by HDFC Bank are exempted services for computing 80% GST threshold limit.
Case-Laws
GST
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

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST on Event Catering with Venue Rental Set at 5% if Room Tariff Below Rs. 7,500; Input Tax Credit Restrictions Apply.
Case-Laws
GST
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

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Baby carriers classified as textile articles, not vehicle parts. Duty based on value: <=Rs. 1000 @ 5%, >Rs. 1000 @ 12%.
Case-Laws
GST
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 classifi

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Ride-hailing app not liable for GST on driver services despite e-commerce tag.
Case-Laws
GST
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. Condi

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Advance Ruling Application Dismissed Due to Non-compliance with GST Act Section 97(2) Clauses; Lacked Relevant Notifications.
Case-Laws
GST
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 h

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST penalty proceedings initiated by State nullifies Centre's jurisdiction on same matter.
Case-Laws
GST
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

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Court Orders Reinstatement of GST Registration After Petitioner Resolves Non-Compliance Issue, Ensuring Business Continuity.
Case-Laws
GST
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 u

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Quashing tax order for violation of natural justice; fresh opportunity granted.
Case-Laws
GST
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

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Milk manufacturer's tax assessment revoked over flawed show cause notice, Covid-19 impact oversight.
Case-Laws
GST
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 ele

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Rejecting appeal without reasons violates natural justice, undermines objectivity.
Case-Laws
GST
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 author

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Advisory: GSTN e-Services App to Replace e-Invoice QR Code Verifier App Shortly
GST
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 details using the GSTIN or PAN.
Return Filing

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Gross and Net GST revenue collections for the month of Sep, 2024
GST
Dated:- 3-10-2024

The gross and net GST revenue collections for the month of September, 2024.
=============
Document 1Traceback (most recent call last):
File “C:\inetpub\vhosts\taxmanagementindia.com\httpdocs\python_image_text_project\google\direct_extract_text.py”, line 19, in
from google_doc_api import process_single_document
File “C:\inetpub\vhosts\taxmanagementindia.com\httpdocs\python_image_text_project\

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Cinema Hall Profiteered Rs. 4.65L by Not Passing GST Rate Cut; Ordered to Refund with Interest.
Case-Laws
GST
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

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Reversal of ITC and opting for lower GST rate resolves tax liability dispute for real estate project.
Case-Laws
GST
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

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Court Upholds Rejection of ITC Claim, Emphasizes Proof of Goods Movement; Fraudulent Vehicles Found.
Case-Laws
GST
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 unle

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =