Author: admin_gst

Finance Act provisions enforced; tax & duty changes effective Nov 1, 2024.
Notifications
GST
This notification brings into force various provisions of the Finance (No. 2) Act, 2024. On the date of publication, sections 118, 142, 148, and 150 come into effect. Sections 114 to 117, 119 to 141, 143 to 147, 149, and 151 to 157 come into force on November 1, 2024. The notification is issued by the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs under the Ministry of Finance, exercising powers co

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Contractor's GST Registration Restored Despite Missed Appeal Deadline; Court Urges Rule Amendments for Fairness.
Case-Laws
GST
The petitioner, a contractor enrolled under the GST Act, 2017, had his GSTN registration canceled due to non-filing of returns for six months. Despite claiming to have handed over documents to an accountant, the petitioner failed to file an appeal within the statutory 90-day period due to being unaware of the proceedings. The court held that the Bombay High Cour

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Taxpayer challenges blocking of input tax credit for alleged forged invoices without actual supply.
Case-Laws
GST
Petitioner sought quashing of intimation blocking input tax credit, alleging forged invoices without actual supply of goods or services. Competent officer had reason to believe the input tax credit claim was fraudulent u/r 86A of GST Rules, 2017. Court held that impugned notices/intimation were within jurisdiction and in accordance with GST Act and Rules. No grounds found to

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Firm seeks migration under GST portal, inability to file returns resolved.
Case-Laws
GST
The petition sought directions for permanent migration of the Petitioner's Firm under the same Goods and Service Tax Number (GSTN) and activation of login credentials on the common portal. The inability to login and migrate prevented the Petitioner from filing returns or paying taxes from July 2017 onwards. In light of the Allahabad High Court judgment in M/s Metro Institutes of Medical Sciences Pvt

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Contradictory stance by tax authorities on GST refund application leads to adverse inference.
Case-Laws
GST
The petitioner's application for GST refund, filed on 08.09.2020, was within the two-year limitation period prescribed u/s 54 of the CGST Act, 2017. The respondents initially treated this application as timely but later rejected a subsequent application dated 28.03.2020 as time-barred, despite it being a continuation of the original timely filed application. The respondents failed

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Fake firms case: Bail granted for alleged ITC fraud without strong evidence.
Case-Laws
GST
Bail granted – creation of fake firms, availing and utilizing ITC – offences u/ss 132(1)(b), 132(1)(c), and 132(5) of CGST Act, 2017 – allegations based on witness statements, no documentary evidence adduced – petitioner languishing in jail since 25.06.2024 – trial unlikely to conclude soon – no apprehension of tampering evidence or flight risk – bail granted on furnishing bail bond of Rs.1,00,000

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Property re-attachment after legal expiry held invalid, bank accounts to be unfrozen.
Case-Laws
GST
Petitioners challenged the re-attachment of their third account by the Department after the initial attachment expired by operation of law u/s 83(2) of the Act. The Court held that once the attachment expires, the Department lacks jurisdiction to re-attach the same account. Consequently, the Court directed lifting of the attachment made on 30.08.2024 on petitioners' third account and orde

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Court Clarifies Rule 86A: Temporary ITC Blocking for Suspected Fraud, Emphasizes Proper Procedure for Revenue Protection.
Case-Laws
GST
This is a summary of a court judgment regarding the interpretation of Rule 86A of the Central Goods and Services Tax (CGST) Rules, which deals with the blocking of input tax credit (ITC). The key points are: Input tax credit is a statutory right subject to conditions under the CGST Act. Rule 86A empowers tax authorities to block debit from a taxpayer's

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Govt's Free Electricity Compensation for Hydro Projects: GST Liability Questioned.
Case-Laws
GST
GST levy on supply of free power questioned – whether free power supplied as compensation to States for distress caused by hydro power projects can be considered “consideration” for services rendered by States to attract GST. Held: Petitioner's contentions have force that free electricity may not constitute “consideration” but “compensation”, raising doubt on leviability of GST. Respondents

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Petitioners' Bank Account Attachment Contested; Court Allows Appeal with Conditions for Stay of Recovery Actions.
Case-Laws
GST
The petitioners challenged the attachment of their bank account and steps taken by the respondents pursuant to an order of rectification, alleging irregular recovery before the expiry of the appeal filing period. The court held that since the petitioners had not filed an appeal against the order u/s 73, they cannot invoke extraordinary writ jurisdiction when an

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Accused granted bail after probe into tax evasion via bogus firms.
Case-Laws
GST
Application seeking regular bail granted – accused allegedly formed bogus firms and evaded tax payments – offences u/ss 132(1)(b), 132(1)(c) and 132(1)(l)(l) of GST Act – investigation completed, charge-sheet filed – maximum punishment 5 years, compoundable offence – considering Supreme Court order in Sandeep Goyal case and accused's custody since 04/03/2024 – bail granted on furnishing personal bond of Rs.

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Tax credit denial set aside; authorities to consider claim as per court's previous ruling.
Case-Laws
GST
The High Court set aside the assessment order denying input tax credit to the petitioner u/s 16(4) of the CGST/SGST Acts. It directed the authorities to consider the petitioner's claim for input tax credit in line with the court's previous judgment in M. Trade Links v. Union of India, which had provided directions regarding the interpretation and application of Section 16(4). The cou

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Advisory on issuance of Notices/Orders without digital signatures of the issuing authorities
GST
Dated:- 26-9-2024

Doubts have been created regarding the validity of documents issued by the tax officers on the common portal viz.  Show cause Notices, Order of Assessment, Refund Orders etc. which are not containing the Digital signatures on the pdf. document downloaded from the common portal. In this context, it is to be mentioned that such documents (i.e. SCN/Orders) are generated on the common portal from the login of the officer, who logs in through Digital Signatures. Further, these documents being computer generated on the command of the officer, may not require physical signatures of the officer as these documents can

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

login through the link https://services.gst.gov.in/services/verifyRfn
It is further mentioned that all the critical actions on the part of officers are performed through digital signature authentication of the officer concerned who is authorised for taking that ac on, such as:. 
1. Issue of any notice in any module
2. Issue of any order in any module
3. Issue of any refund order
Thanks 
Team GSTN
=============
Document 1
↑
0
https://services.gst.gov.in/services/verifyRfn
Goods and Services Tax
Government of India, States and Union Territories
Home
Services
GST Law
Skip to Main Content
REGISTER
LOGIN
Downloads â–¼ Search Taxpayer
Help and Taxpayer Facilities
e-Invoice
News and Updates
Dashboard Ser

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Penalty reduced in e-waybill updation case due to genuine difficulty.
Case-Laws
GST
Petition for review dismissed concerning imposition of penalty for non-updation of four e-waybills. Court acknowledged e-waybills were updated within two minutes of interception and genuine difficulty in immediately updating part-B. Previous order, being non-speaking and harsh, modified penalty to Rs. 50,000/-. Difficult to conclude court overlooked non-updation of part-B of fourth e-waybill. No reason t

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Quashed ITC denial order for dual GSTIN against single PAN; ITC adjustment allowed as per Circular 183/15/2022.
Case-Laws
GST
High Court quashed order denying adjustment of Input Tax Credit appearing in GSTR-2A due to issuance of two GSTINs against one PAN. Circular No.183/15/2022-GST applied, aligning with previous judgments allowing benefit of circulars issued during pendency of appeals. Joint Commissioner directed to pass fresh order in line with the circular, allowing adjustment of

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

High Court Overturns Denial of SEZ Unit GST Refund, Citing Precedent from Britannia Industries Case.
Case-Laws
GST
The High Court quashed the order rejecting the refund claim of the petitioner, an SEZ Unit, on the ground that the petitioner was not allowed to claim a refund under the GST law. The Court held that the ratio laid down in the Britannia Industries Limited case, where it was held that the refund claim for the tax period on supplies made to an SEZ Unit/Developer can be claimed

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Tax liability determination flawed: Jurisdictional issues, non-consideration of reply on RCM and trade payables.
Case-Laws
GST
Principles of natural justice violated due to lack of jurisdiction and non-application of mind. Reverse Charge Mechanism (RCM) liability issue: Petitioner's reply on amounts declared and paid under RCM greater than notice amount disregarded. Trade payables issue: Petitioner's reply on all trade payables below 180 days ignored without consideration. Impugned orde

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST assessment order set aside for fresh decision after procedural lapse, subject to partial deposit.
Case-Laws
GST
Petitioner challenged assessment orders citing lack of jurisdiction, as entire duty liability was discharged from ITC availed at import. Court rejected jurisdiction challenge based on precedent, holding respondent competent to pass order under circular and GST Act provisions. However, petitioner failed to provide proper reply with tabulations and documents when show cause

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Petitioner Entitled to Input Tax Credit Under CENVAT Rules; Court Condones Procedural Irregularities, Quashes Order.
Case-Laws
GST
The High Court ruled that the petitioner's entitlement to avail Input Tax Credit under the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 cannot be denied, as long as the credit was validly earned. The court relied on the Supreme Court's decision in Collector of Central Excise, Pune v. Dai Ichi Karkaria Ltd., which held that validly earned credit is indefeasible and cannot be re

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Incorrect tax return filing led to refund rejection; court orders reconsideration after hearing petitioner's arguments.
Case-Laws
GST
The court held that the officer failed to consider the petitioner's case that the amount received in February 2024 was erroneously described as an advance, which was rectified by filing an amended return. This aspect was not considered while passing the order rejecting the refund claim. Consequently, the order was quashed, and the respondents were directe

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Court Rules GST Registration Cancellation Unlawful; Orders Restoration Due to Lack of Statutory Support and Unreasonable Action.
Case-Laws
GST
This is a case involving the cancellation of a petitioner's GST registration by the respondent authorities. The court held that Section 16(2)(c) and Rule 86B of the GST Rules, which were relied upon for cancellation, lack statutory backing under the GST Act and are ultra vires. The cancellation of registration was deemed a disproportionate punish

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

A government-owned company loses GST exemption on legal services due to insufficient equity stake.
Case-Laws
GST
The key points are: The applicant (THDCIL) does not qualify as a “Government Entity” under GST laws as it fails to meet the criteria of having 90% or more equity or control by the government. Although initially established with 100% government equity, currently the government's stake is only 25.504% due to equity dilution. Consequently, THDCIL cannot avail the GST exemption o

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Firm's auditor wrongly served GST notice due to absent GST authorization; order passed denying personal hearing.
Case-Laws
GST
Petitioner failed to authorize representative for GST matters after registration under GST regime, resulting in show cause notice being served on auditor without petitioner's knowledge. Petitioner unable to respond or attend hearing due to lack of notice. Order passed without granting opportunity of personal hearing, violating natural justice principles. High Co

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Acetylene gas supply not covered u/r 55, requires tax invoice – High Court directs authorities to revisit penalties.
Case-Laws
GST
The High Court held that Rule 55 of the CGST Rules, 2017 applies only to the four circumstances mentioned in Rule 55 (a) to (d), and the supply of Acetylene Gas is not covered by Rule 55 (a). Therefore, the goods should have been covered by a tax invoice. The competent authorities were directed to consider the case u/s 122 of the CGST/SGST Acts and impose ap

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Bank documents seizure challenged, court orders return for business operations. Attachment orders set aside pending liability determination.
Case-Laws
GST
Challenge to provisional attachment order concerning bank account – pre-show cause notice issued – court held documents seized should be returned as petitioner is in real estate business and requires documents for operations – order of seizure not interfered with but respondents directed to return seized documents – regarding provisio

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =