Author: admin_gst

High Court Annuls Assessment Order for ITC on Motor Cars, Citing Lack of Communication and Natural Justice Violation.
Case-Laws
GST
The petitioner challenged the assessment order and summary in Form DRC-07 for wrongfully claiming Input Tax Credit (ITC) on the purchase of four motor cars, which was ineligible u/s 17(5) of the CGST/TNGST Act, 2017. The petitioner was unaware of the notices due to the introduction of a new “View Additional Notices and Orders” feature on the GST portal, whi

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Denial of personal hearing before issuing adverse order on excess ITC claim & GST short payment violates natural justice.
Case-Laws
GST
Violation of principles of natural justice by not granting opportunity of personal hearing before issuing adjudication order demanding excess availment of Input Tax Credit and short payment of output GST, despite adverse decision being contemplated against petitioners. Section 75(4) of GST Act mandates granting opportunity of hearing in such cases, irre

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST Authorities Must Follow GST Act Procedures Before Prosecution; IPC Use Without Sanction Is Invalid.
Case-Laws
GST
The High Court held that GST Authorities cannot launch prosecution invoking penal provisions under the Indian Penal Code without invoking penal provisions of the GST Act, when the alleged offenses are covered under the GST Act provisions. This is especially true without obtaining sanction u/s 132(6) of the GST Act. The GST Act is a special legislation comprehensively dea

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Tax authorities advised voluntary payments without legal basis, quashed by court.
Case-Laws
GST
The High Court quashed a letter dated March 13, 2024, issued by the Superintendent (A.E.) Central Goods and Service Tax, Gautam Budh Nagar, advising voluntary tax payments without proper legal basis. The Court observed that the Department was advising the petitioner to make voluntary payments without issuing any show cause notice/demand notice/recovery notice, which is unknown in law. The res

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Supreme Court: Fresh Grounds Needed for Renewed Asset Attachment Orders; Provisional Order Quashed.
Case-Laws
GST
Provisional attachment order u/s 83 of the Act expires after one year. The department cannot issue a second notice for provisional attachment without providing fresh reasons. The Supreme Court held that a second attachment may be made, but the department must justify it with new grounds. Allowing repeated attachments without fresh reasons would render Section 83(2) redundant

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Tax demand adjournment rejected despite valid reasons; opportunity granted on part-payment.
Case-Laws
GST
Principles of natural justice violated due to lack of reasonable opportunity to contest tax demand. Petitioner cited ongoing tax audit and father's illness for seeking adjournment, but failed to submit substantive reply from September 2023 to February 2024 despite sufficient time. Considering health records submitted, petitioner granted opportunity to contest demand by remitting 10%

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Unfair tax demand due to lack of proper communication; order set aside for reconsideration after partial payment.
Case-Laws
GST
Principles of natural justice violated due to lack of proper communication regarding show cause notice and order, leading to tax demand confirmation without petitioner's response. Court set aside the order and remanded matter for reconsideration, subject to petitioner remitting 10% of disputed tax demand within two weeks, acknowledging procedural lapse despite

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Taxpayer denied natural justice; GST reconciliation errors reconsidered after proof of payment.
Case-Laws
GST
The court held that the petitioner was denied the principles of natural justice by not being given a reasonable opportunity to contest the tax demand on merits regarding the difference between GSTR 3B and GSTR 1, and the RCM liability mismatch. The petitioner provided proof of payment for the GSTR 3B and GSTR 1 difference, and substantiated the RCM liability mismatch as an inadv

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Seizure and Penalty Orders Quashed for Lack of UP E-way Bill; Court Cites Non-enforceability During March 2018.
Case-Laws
GST
Seizure order for detention of goods due to absence of State E-way Bill was challenged. The Court held that at the time of interception, the Central E-way Bill under GST Act was available, and only the E-way Bill under UP GST Act was not present, which was later produced before passing the penalty order. The issue was covered by previous Division Bench judgments,

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Court Rules in Favor of Petitioner on GST Classification, Quashes Notices, and Directs Regularization of Past Returns.
Case-Laws
GST
Challenge to show cause notice u/s 74 of Central/Gujarat Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 regarding classification of product manufactured by petitioner under HSN 19059040 instead of HSN 19059030 and consequent levy of GST. Court held that in view of minutes of GST Council meeting and circular dated 1st August, 2023, issue was to be regularized on 'as is w

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Petitioner wins stay on recovery, must appeal & pre-deposit 10% tax (excluding 'Fish Meal') within 30 days.
Case-Laws
GST
The High Court, considering the precedent set in the case of Rehoboth Fish Meal and Oil Plant, held that the petitioner should be granted a stay on recovery proceedings pending further orders from the Supreme Court. The petitioner was directed to file a statutory appeal before the Appellate Authority/Commissioner of GST & Central Excise (Appeals) within 30 days. Addi

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Petitioners to get refund on differential GST paid for pre-GST works contracts/composite supplies.
Case-Laws
GST
The High Court directed the respondents to refund the differential GST amount, being the difference between GST and VAT, paid by the petitioner for each works contract/composite supply executed before July 1, 2017. The Court held that payments received by the petitioners pre-GST for works executed before July 1, 2017, are assessable under the KVAT tax regime, either under the

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Tax Demand on Service Aspect of Composite Supply Violates CGST Act, Certain Demands Dropped, Petitioner May Appeal Remaining Issues.
Case-Laws
GST
The High Court held that the demand for tax on the service aspect of a composite supply involving import of goods and related services like transportation and insurance is in violation of Section 2(30) read with Section 8 of the CGST Act, following the Supreme Court's decision in Union of India Vs. M/s.Mohit Minerals Pvt. Ltd. Consequently, t

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Appeal Required for IGST Refund and Input Tax Credit Dispute; Notification No. 09/2023 Validity Challenged.
Case-Laws
GST
Wrongful availment and passing on of input tax credit, wrongful availment of IGST refund under Advance Authorisation scheme. Constitutional validity of Notification No. 09/2023-Central Tax dated 31.03.2023 questioned, whether ultra-vires the CGST Act provisions. Held that the challenged order is dated 21.02.2024, and the challenge is on merits. Appeal lies before the

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Court Orders Refund of Unutilized Input Tax Credit with Interest to be Processed Within 12 Weeks.
Case-Laws
GST
The petitioner had unutilized Input Tax Credit (ITC) of Rs.2,42,15,906/- under the VAT Act for the period from 1st April 2017 to 30th June 2017, which was carried forward to the GST regime by filing Form GST TRAN 1. Subsequently, the petitioner reversed the ITC in the Electronic Credit Ledger by filing Form DRC-03. The High Court, relying on its previous decision in R. N. Labo

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Rejected damaged paddy not fit for human consumption, taxable; exemption denied.
Case-Laws
GST
Rejected damaged paddy is classified under HSN 1006 10 90, not 1006 10 10, as it lacks characteristics of seed quality cereal crop and is unfit for human consumption. The exemption under S.No.70 of N/N. 02/2017-Central Tax (Rate) for rice (other than pre-packaged and labelled) is inapplicable as rejected damaged paddy has lost its food quality and human consumption value, being used for indust

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST Classification of Natural Fibre Composite Board: Wood or Fibreboard? Exploring Tax Implications and Rates.
Case-Laws
GST
The matter pertains to the classification and applicable GST rate for a Natural Fibre Composite board manufactured by the applicant. The board comprises natural fibre, calcium carbonate, recycling waste, processing aids, and PVC resin as a binding agent. The issue revolves around whether the product should be classified under Chapter 44 as wood and articles of woo

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Naval vessel services focused on upgrades and installations don't qualify as MRO services, missing tax concessions.
Case-Laws
GST
The applicant's services related to a naval vessel do not qualify as “Maintenance, repair or overhaul services” (MRO services) under Entry 25(ib) of Notification No. 11/2017 Central Tax (Rate) dated 28.06.2017 as amended by Notification No. 02/2021-Central Tax (rate) dated 02.06.2021. The services provided by the applicant, while related to a naval vessel, do

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST Applies to Export of Pre-Packaged Frozen Shrimps; 5% Tax on Shrimps Up to 25kg, Including Exports.
Case-Laws
GST
This legal case deals with the applicability of Goods and Services Tax (GST) on the export of pre-packaged and labelled frozen shrimps. The key points are: According to the Legal Metrology Act, 2009 and rules, if the inner packaging is printed with a pre-determined quantity, it is considered a 'pre-packaged and labelled' commodity for retail sale, regardless of whether th

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Domestic supply treated as local sale; no zero-rating for unregistered non-exporter.
Case-Laws
GST
Determination of whether an outward supply of goods procured by the applicant from an Indian company undergoing liquidation can be considered a zero-rated supply under GST, allowing export without payment of tax against a Letter of Undertaking (LUT). The key points are: The place of supply is within India as the goods are delivered to the applicant's premises in India. The applicant lacks

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Seized cash returned to owner due to lack of evidence about illegal source.
Case-Laws
GST
This case pertains to the release of seized cash. The cash was found at the petitioner's office premises, and due to the lack of satisfactory evidence regarding its source, it was seized by the authorities. The High Court directed the respondents to remit the seized cash amount, along with the accrued interest, to the petitioner's bank account forthwith, as the cash was kept in a fixed deposit acco

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Cancellation order due to unsubstantiated fraud allegations violated natural justice; revocation rejection set aside for fair hearing.
Case-Laws
GST
Impugned show cause notice reproduced provisions of Section 29(2)(e) without specifying alleged fraud, misstatement or suppression of facts by petitioner. Cancellation order passed in violation of principles of natural justice. Instead of setting aside cancellation order, order rejecting revocation application set aside to provide opportuni

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Petitioner claims coerced tax deposit, disputes Input Tax Credit denial. Respondent denies coercion, calls deposit voluntary.
Case-Laws
GST
Petitioner deposited amount under alleged coercion and protest, claiming inadmissible Input Tax Credit availed. Respondent disputed coercion, stating voluntary deposit. Court observed deposits not made during raid or custody, but under alleged threat of cancellation of registration. Petitioner could have availed remedies against such threats. Court

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Tax Recovery Notices Annulled; Case Remanded for Fresh Order After Input Tax Credit Ruling.
Case-Laws
GST
The case pertains to recovery of arrears of tax for Assessment Years 2017-2018 and 2018-2019 due to non-filing of returns. The petitioner had previously suffered Assessment Orders u/s 62 of the Tamil Nadu Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, erroneously mentioned as Section 63. The Finance Act, 2024 introduced amendments incorporating Sections 16(5) and 16(6) in the Central Goods and S

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Tax assessment order quashed for violation of natural justice; case remanded with conditions.
Case-Laws
GST
The High Court partly allowed the challenge to the assessment order passed by the second respondent for the Assessment Year 2017-2018. The Court quashed the impugned Assessment Order for violating principles of natural justice and lack of jurisdiction. It remitted the case to the respondents to pass a fresh order, subject to conditions: the petitioner shall deposit 10% of the disp

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =