Author: admin_gst

Taxpayer's Challenge Rejected: Appellate Remedies Mandated for CGST Penalty Dispute Under Section 107
Case-Laws
GST
HC dismissed the writ petition, directing the petitioner to pursue appellate remedies under Section 107 of CGST Act. The court held that factual issues regarding penalty imposition, transaction benefits, and financial year challenges should be adjudicated through the appellate process. The petitioner retains the right to contest the CGST Department's penalty under Section 122(1A) through appropriate appellate channels, with the appellate authority deemed most suitable to comprehensively examine the matter.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Hospitality stakeholders hail GST rebate for hotels in Goa's hinterland
GST
Dated:- 16-4-2025
PTI
Panaji, Apr 16 (PTI) Stakeholders of the hospitality industry in Goa have welcomed the state government's announcement in the Budget to provide a 50 per cent rebate in the Goods and Services Tax and other perks for those investing in hotels in the state's hinterland.
Chief Minister Pramod Sawant, who tabled the state budget during the legislative assembly session last month, had announced incentives for the hospitality industry.
Sawant said that to promote infrastructure in the hotel and medical tourism sector, the state government has proposed a 50 per cent rebate on the state GST, exemption in stamp duty and registration, a waiv

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Advisory on Case Insensitivity in IRN Generation
GST
Dated:- 16-4-2025

Dear Taxpayer,
1. This is to inform you that, effective 1st June 2025, the IRP (Invoice Reporting Portal) would treat invoice/document numbers as case-insensitive for the purpose of IRN generation.
2. To ensure consistency and avoid duplication, invoice numbers reported in any format (e.g., “abc”, “ABC”, or “Abc”) would be automatically converted to uppercase before IRN generation. This change aligns with the t

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Landmark Ruling: Retrospective Tax Amendments Struck Down as Unconstitutional, Protecting Taxpayers from Arbitrary Legislative Overreach
Case-Laws
GST
HC declared amendments to CGST and KGST Acts unconstitutional, finding retrospective modifications ultra vires the Constitution. The court held that legislative amendments improperly expanded the definition of “supply” and “service” by disregarding the principle of mutuality. The retrospective taxation violated fundamental principles of fairness and Rule of Law, as it imposed unexpected tax burdens on entities without prior notice or opportunity to adjust. The amendments were deemed void, emphasizing constitutional limitations on legislative power to redefine taxation principles retroactively. The judgment reinforced constitutional protections against arbitrary legislative interventions in taxation frameworks.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

High Court Validates CENVAT Credit Utilization, Affirms Unified Tax Credit Ledger Approach for Electronic Input Tax Reconciliation
Case-Laws
GST
HC allowed petitioner's challenge regarding CENVAT credit utilization, affirming that input tax credit electronic ledger represents a unified wallet with compartments for IGST, CGST, and SGST. The court referenced prior precedent emphasizing that tax credit eligibility should be assessed based on total wallet balance, not individual compartments. The 3rd respondent was directed to issue fresh orders within two months, consistent with the judicial interpretation, effectively resolving the inadvertent tax credit mismatch between GSTR 3B and GSTR 2A forms.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Geometry Compass Box Ruled as Mixed Supply, GST Rate Set at 18% Based on Highest-Taxed Component Under Section 2(74)
Case-Laws
GST
The AAR determined that the Geometry Compass Box constitutes a mixed supply under Section 2(74), not a composite supply. The box contains multiple discrete items (compass, divider, scale, protractor, set squares, pencil, eraser, sharpener) which can be independently purchased. Since individual components are commercially available separately, the combination does not qualify as naturally bundled goods. Consequently, the HSN classification falls under Chapter Sub Heading 90178010, with an applicable GST rate of 18%, based on the highest tax-rated item within the package.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Legal Challenge Halts GST Demand as Appellate Tribunal Remains Unformed, Ensuring Statutory Appeal Rights Under Section 112
Case-Laws
GST
HC granted an unconditional stay of GST demand due to the absence of a constituted Appellate Tribunal under Section 112 of the GST Act. The court recognized the petitioners' statutory right to appeal and noted the Tribunal's non-existence. An interim stay was issued on the demand in Form GST APL-04, with directions for affidavit-in-opposition to be filed within eight weeks and potential reply within four weeks thereafter. The stay was granted for four weeks, acknowledging the petitioners' prima facie case.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Land Development Agreement Not Subject to GST, Revenue Sharing Arrangement Upheld with Interim Relief Granted to Petitioner
Case-Laws
GST
HC adjudicated a dispute concerning a development agreement's revenue sharing arrangement between parties. The court determined that the transaction did not constitute a taxable transfer under GST law. Even if a transfer was presumed, it would involve immovable property, which falls outside GST taxation scope. The court found a prima facie case for interim relief exists. Respondents were mandated to file an affidavit in reply within two weeks and serve a copy on petitioner's counsel. The petition was subsequently disposed of, effectively granting preliminary relief to the petitioner.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Tax Recovery Notice Upheld: Procedural Challenges Rejected Despite GST Tribunal and Pre-Deposit Concerns
Case-Laws
GST
HC dismissed the writ petition challenging tax recovery proceedings. The petition contested the validity of recovery notice issued on 13.02.2025 for tax, interest, and penalty, alleging procedural irregularities including non-constitution of GST Tribunal and non-compliance with pre-deposit requirements under Section 112(8). Upon filing of a reply affidavit by the Excise & Taxation Officer, the court rendered the petition infructuous, effectively maintaining the original tax demand without substantive adjudication of the underlying legal challenges.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Employer Canteen and Transport Services Taxable Under GST, Recoveries Subject to Levy and Input Tax Credit Restrictions
Case-Laws
GST
Legal Summary: The AAR ruled on GST applicability for employee canteen and transportation services. The employer's provision of these services constitutes a taxable supply under Section 7(1) of CGST Act, 2017, with GST levied on the recoveries made from employees. Transportation services do not qualify for exemption under Notification No. 12/2017 and are classified as rented vehicle services. Input Tax Credit (ITC) is denied for transportation services, as they are considered personal consumption under Section 17(5)(g). The taxable value comprises only the amount recovered from employees, with the employer's remaining contribution treated as a non-taxable perquisite in lieu of employee services.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

E-way Bill Compliance: Complete Documentation Mandatory for Goods Transport, Partial Filling Signals Potential Tax Evasion
Case-Laws
GST
HC ruled that carrying a complete e-way bill is mandatory for goods transportation. The petitioner was found transporting goods without fully completing the e-way bill (Part B), which was generated only after vehicle interception. The court held that merely downloading Part A of the e-way bill does not absolve tax liability. The petitioner's conduct suggested an intention to evade tax, as the e-way bill inconsistently reflected transportation details. Following precedents in Akhilesh Traders and Jhansi Enterprises, the court established that incomplete documentation creates a rebuttable presumption of tax evasion. The petition was consequently dismissed, reinforcing the strict requirement of comprehensive e-way bill documentation post-April 2018.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Employer-Provided Canteen and Transport Services Deemed Taxable Supply Under GST with Limited Input Tax Credit Restrictions
Case-Laws
GST
AAR ruled that recoveries from employees for canteen and transportation services constitute taxable supply under GST. The services are considered incidental to business activities, with tax liability limited to amounts recovered from employees. Input tax credit is disallowed for both canteen and transportation services under Section 17(5) of CGST Act. Transportation services do not qualify for exemption under Notification No. 12/2017-Central Tax (Rate). The remaining service value, not recovered from employees, is treated as employer-provided perquisite and remains non-taxable. The ruling emphasizes that while services are supplied by the employer to employees, only the recovered portion attracts GST.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Landmark GST Voucher Ruling: Clarifies Tax Treatment, Distribution Models, and Unredeemed Instrument Taxation Principles
Circulars
GST – States
Legal Summary: The AP State Tax Authority issued a comprehensive clarification on GST treatment of vouchers, addressing four key issues. The ruling determines that voucher transactions are neither a supply of goods nor services, whether the vouchers are RBI-recognized pre-paid instruments or actionable claims. Transactions involving voucher distribution through principal-to-principal models do not attract GST, while agency-based distributions may incur GST on commissions. Additional services related to voucher distribution remain taxable. Critically, unredeemed vouchers (breakage) are not considered taxable, as they do not constitute a supply of goods or services when no redemption occurs. The guidance aims to provide uniformity in GST implementation across field formations.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST Council Clarifies Tax Rates for Agricultural Goods, Construction Materials, and Motor Vehicle Compensation Cess
Circulars
GST – States
The CCST issued a comprehensive circular clarifying multiple GST-related matters based on the 55th GST Council meeting recommendations. Key clarifications include: (1) pepper of genus Piper attracts 5% GST, with agriculturists supplying dried pepper exempt from registration; (2) agriculturists supplying raisins are GST-exempt; (3) ready-to-eat popcorn has differentiated GST rates (5-18%) based on ingredients and packaging; (4) autoclaved aerated concrete blocks with over 50% fly ash content attract 12% GST; and (5) amendments to motor vehicle compensation cess apply from 26.07.2023. The circular aims to provide uniformity and clarity in GST implementation across jurisdictions.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Protective Sealing of Godown Preserves Stakeholder Interests During GST Registration Cancellation Review Process
Case-Laws
GST
HC held that in the matter of GST registration cancellation, the sealing of the godown was a protective measure to safeguard stakeholders' interests, not based on inter-party disputes. The directive was implemented to prevent goods removal pending the Commissioner's decision on registration revocation application. The court emphasized a time-bound resolution process to ensure fair treatment and protect the rights of all parties, including financial institutions. The interim protective order was deemed appropriate to maintain status quo until a definitive determination could be made regarding the registration cancellation.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Tax Credit Rectification Requires Fair Hearing: Administrative Order Invalidated Due to Lack of Personal Opportunity to Present Case
Case-Laws
GST
HC ruled on input tax credit rectification under Section 161 of Delhi GST Act, finding procedural irregularities in the administrative order. The court held that when rectification potentially adversely impacts the applicant's rights, principles of natural justice mandate providing personal hearing. Since the petitioner was not afforded an opportunity to be heard, the rectification order dated 28th February 2025 was set aside, thereby ensuring due process and fundamental fairness in administrative proceedings.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Procedural Fairness Prevails: Petitioner Granted Opportunity to Respond to Show Cause Notice, Ensuring Right to Be Heard
Case-Laws
GST
HC found a violation of natural justice principles as the petitioner was not afforded an opportunity to respond to the Show Cause Notice (SCN). The court remanded the matter back to the concerned department, directing it to provide the petitioner a fair hearing. The petitioner was granted 30 days to file a response to the SCN, ensuring procedural fairness and the right to be heard. The petition was disposed of through remand, allowing for a fresh consideration of the case with proper adherence to principles of natural justice.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Legal Heir Seeks GST Refund Recovery After Department's Prolonged Delay in Implementing Prior Judicial Directive
Case-Laws
GST
HC found that despite prior judicial directive to re-credit the electronic cash ledger refund within two weeks, the GST Department failed to process the legal heir's claim for excess balance. The court expressed concern over the persistent administrative inaction, highlighting the petitioner's repeated attempts to secure the refund. The matter was scheduled for further hearing, emphasizing the need for administrative compliance with previous judicial instructions regarding the refund of the deceased proprietor's electronic cash ledger balance.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Tax Dispute Resolution: ITC Misstatement Requires 10% Deposit, Appeal Rights Preserved Under Conditional Order
Case-Laws
GST
HC adjudicated a tax dispute involving Input Tax Credit (ITC) misstatement. The court determined that the petitioner must follow prescribed guidelines by depositing 10% of the disputed amount within eight weeks. The demand confirmed by the Appellate Authority shall remain stayed until GST Appellate Tribunal's constitution. Upon tribunal notification, petitioner may file appeal through standard procedural mechanisms. The ex-parte order was conditionally modified, providing a structured pathway for potential further legal recourse while mandating partial financial compliance.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

High Court Validates Retrospective ITC Extension, Allowing Tax Credit Claims Beyond Original Statutory Deadlines Under Section 16(4)
Case-Laws
GST
HC allowed the petition concerning irregularly availed Input Tax Credit (ITC), finding that Circular dated 15.10.2024 retrospectively extended the time limit for ITC under Section 16(4) of CGST Act, 2017. The Deputy Solicitor General conceded that petitioner is now entitled to the previously denied ITC based on the new notification and circular provisions. The court's ruling effectively reinstates the petitioner's right to claim input tax credit beyond the original statutory cut-off dates, providing retrospective relief for tax credit claims.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST Rate Dispute Resolved: Contractual Interpretation Favors Full Reimbursement Under Unexpected Tax Changes
Case-Laws
GST
The HC adjudicated a dispute concerning GST rate changes and contractual variation clauses. The court found that the Arbitral Tribunal misinterpreted contractual provisions regarding Input Tax Credit (ITC) and statutory variation clauses. The arbitral award was set aside due to misapplication of contract terms, disregard of GST regime principles, and failure to provide reasoned justification. The HC held that the employer was contractually obligated to reimburse the full GST amount, particularly given the unexpected GST rate increase from 5% to 12%. The court emphasized that state instrumentalities cannot adopt arbitrary approaches in contract interpretation. Consequently, the petition was allowed, and the impugned arbitral award was set aside.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Tax Credit Challenge Dismissed: Procedural Fairness Confirmed, Petitioner Directed to Pursue Statutory Remedies Under Section 107
Case-Laws
GST
HC determined that the petitioner failed to demonstrate procedural irregularities in tax credit proceedings. Despite claims of inadequate document disclosure, the court found all Relied Upon Documents were properly supplied and adequate hearing opportunities provided. The court rejected allegations of natural justice violations, noting the petitioner's deliberate non-participation in adjudication proceedings. The ruling directed the petitioner to pursue remedies under Section 107 of CGST Act, affirming the original order's validity. Cash seizure was not upheld as the CGST Act does not categorize cash as “goods”. Petition was ultimately disposed of, maintaining the original administrative order's substantive findings.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Procedural Fairness Prevails: Hearing Notice Violation Leads to Order Quashing and Remand for Proper Consideration under GST Act Section 75(4)
Case-Laws
GST
HC found a violation of natural justice where respondent issued a personal hearing notice before reply deadline and subsequently passed an order without considering petitioner's detailed reply. The impugned order was contrary to Section 75(4) of GST Act, as the petitioner was not provided a meaningful opportunity to be heard. The HC set aside the order dated 30.04.2024 and remanded the matter for fresh consideration, ensuring procedural fairness and adherence to principles of natural justice in administrative proceedings.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Multiple Show Cause Notices Challenged: Final Assessment Orders Suspended Pending Comprehensive Judicial Review of Overlapping Tax Periods
Case-Laws
GST
HC adjudicated a case involving multiple Show Cause Notices (SCNs) with overlapping assessment periods. The court acknowledged existing final assessment orders and stipulated that any subsequent order would be contingent upon the writ petition's ultimate outcome. The respondents were mandated to submit written replies within three weeks, with the petitioner granted two additional weeks to file a rejoinder affidavit. The matter was scheduled for further hearing on 19.03.2025, effectively maintaining procedural continuity while preserving the petitioner's right to challenge the assessment orders through the pending writ petition.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Advisory on reporting values in Table 3.2 of GSTR-3B
GST
Dated:- 11-4-2025

1. Table 3.2 of Form GSTR-3B captures the inter-state supplies made to unregistered persons, composition taxpayers, and UIN holders out of the supplies declared in Table 3.1 & 3.1.1 of GSTR-3B. The values in Table 3.2 of GSTR-3B auto-populates from corresponding inter-state supplies declared in GSTR-1, GSTR-1A, and IFF in requisite tables.
2. It is to inform you that from April-2025 tax period, inter-state supplies auto-populated in Table 3.2 of GSTR-3B will be made non-editable. The GSTR-3B shall be filed with the auto-populated values as generated by the system only.
3. Therefore, in case any modification/amendment is required in auto-

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

-editable, and taxpayers will need to file GSTR-3B with the auto-populated values generated by the system only.
2. How can I rectify values in Table 3.2 of GSTR-3B if incorrect values have been auto-populated after April 2025 period onwards due to incorrect reporting of the same through GSTR-1?
If incorrect values are auto-populated in Table 3.2 after April 2025, taxpayers need to correct the values by making amendments through Form GSTR-1A or through Form GSTR-1/IFF filed for subsequent tax periods.
3. What should I do to ensure accurate reporting in Table 3.2 of GSTR-3B?
Taxpayers should ensure that the inter-state supplies are reported correctly in their GSTR-1, GSTR-1A, or IFF. This will ensure that the accurate values are auto-popu

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =