Author: admin_gst

Court Upholds GST Registration Cancellation Due to Late Appeal and Non-Compliance with Filing Requirements.
Case-Laws
GST
The High Court dismissed the petition challenging the rejection of appeal against cancellation of GST registration for non-compliance with GST REG 2017. The petitioner failed to furnish returns u/s 39 of the CGST Act, 2017. The show cause notice was issued on 15.01.2023, and the GST registration was cancelled vide order dated 15.01.2023. However, the petitioner filed

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

High Court Quashes Consolidated GST Show Cause Notice for Multiple Years, Allows Separate Notices.
Case-Laws
GST
The High Court set aside the show cause notice and summary issued by the respondent u/s 74 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 for multiple financial years spanning January 2018 to August 2022. Relying on the coordinate bench judgment in M/S. VEREMAX TECHNOLOGIE SERVICES LIMITED, the Court held that the respondent erred in issuing a consolidated show cause notice

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Anticipatory Bail Upheld in Rs. 7 Crore Misappropriation Case Despite Grave Allegations.
Case-Laws
GST
The High Court dismissed the petitions seeking cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to accused Nos. 1 and 2, who were alleged to have misappropriated over Rs. 7 crores by misusing credentials and withdrawing funds from accounts, instead of paying statutory dues. Despite the grave allegations of economic offenses u/ss 406 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code, the court held that the of

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Petition Dismissed: Failure to Exhaust Remedies and Unjustified Delay in Filing Under Article 226.
Case-Laws
GST
The petition was dismissed by the High Court as no case was made out to depart from the usual rule of exhaustion of alternative remedies. The key reasons were: 1) An alternative remedy of appeal was available against the impugned order, although the petitioner contended violation of principles of natural justice. 2) The petition was filed almost a year after the impugned orde

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Extended GSTR-3B filing due date till 11th Dec for businesses in Murshidabad, West Bengal.
Notifications
GST
The Commissioner, on the recommendations of the Council, has extended the due date for filing FORM GSTR-3B for the month of October 2024 till 11th December 2024 for registered persons whose principal place of business is in Murshidabad district of West Bengal. This extension is granted under sub-section (6) of section 39 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 for those r

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Transitional CENVAT credit allowed for claiming GST refund despite delay in Form GST TRAN-1 processing.
Case-Laws
GST
The petitioner challenged the refund sanctioning orders u/s 54 of the CGST Act on the ground that the unutilized Input Tax Credit (ITC), including transitional credit from CENVAT, was ignored. The High Court held that the provisions of Section 54 would apply, and the authorities could not deprive the petitioner of the CENVAT credit available on 01.07.2017 merely because

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Applicability of penalty under GST law questioned for GSTR mismatch without fraud allegations.
Case-Laws
GST
The High Court expressed doubt on the applicability of Section 74 of the CGST Act, 2017 for mere mismatch between GSTR-3B and GSTR-1, as the said provision can be invoked only if fraud, willful misstatement or suppression of facts is alleged. The respondents were permitted to proceed with the impugned Show Cause Notice, but any final orders passed shall not be given effect until

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Court Overturns GST Registration Cancellation Due to Lack of Evidence, Orders from 2022 and 2024 Nullified.
Case-Laws
GST
The High Court quashed the orders dated 29 December 2022, 20 February 2024, and the appellate authority's order dated 08 July 2024, cancelling the petitioner's GST registration retrospectively on grounds of fraud, willful misstatement or suppression of facts. The Court found that the authorities failed to provide cogent material indicating the registration was origin

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Excessive tax payment rectified, refund granted for GST return error.
Case-Laws
GST
The petitioner was entitled to a refund of Rs. 53,08,494/- which was paid in excess along with the return in Form GSTR-3B for the month of March 2023. The excess payment arose due to rectification of an error committed while filing the return for January 2023, wherein the reverse charge liability was not reflected separately and was clubbed with the output tax liability. The High Court allowed the petiti

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

High court directs taxpayer to fulfill pre-deposit conditions, exhaust alternate remedies before challenging tax order.
Case-Laws
GST
The High Court dismissed the petition and directed the petitioner to exhaust alternate remedies by fulfilling pre-deposit conditions. The court held that no case was made out to depart from the practice of exhausting alternate remedies. The argument that CBIC circulars were not followed could be raised before the appellate authority. Merely styling the im

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Refund claim for IGST dismissed due to lack of territorial jurisdiction.
Case-Laws
GST
The High Court dismissed the writ petition filed by the petitioner seeking directions to the respondents to issue a refund of Integrated Goods & Services Tax (IGST) along with interest due to lack of territorial jurisdiction. The Court held that since the petitioner's application for refund was made at the ports of export and the claim was to be dealt with by the Customs Authorities of the port, the c

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Bogus Invoicing Scam: Bail Granted in Fake Firms Case.
Case-Laws
GST
The High Court granted bail to the applicant u/ss 132(1)(b), 132(1)(c) read with Section 132(1)(i) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The case involved the creation of fake firms and issuance of bogus bills and invoices without any supply of goods and services. Considering the facts, nature of the offence, punishment, available material, the applicant's lack of criminal history, and the release of a co-ac

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST shocker: Court strikes down orders for lack of fair hearing, remands case.
Case-Laws
GST
The High Court quashed the orders dated 01.02.2022 and 24.04.2024 passed against the petitioner u/s 74 of the GST Act. The petitioner had availed input tax credit by mistake but did not utilize it. The original order was passed without providing an opportunity for personal hearing, violating the principles of natural justice and Section 75(4) of the GST Act. The matter was remanded to the adjudi

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GSTR-9 Annual Return and GST reporting: Handling mismatches between auto-populated 8A & 8C.
News
GST
For FY 2023-24 onwards, Table 8A of Form GSTR-9 will be auto-populated from GSTR-2B, leading to a mismatch between values in Tables 8A and 8C. The advisory provides guidance on reporting various scenarios in GSTR-9, such as invoices reported late by suppliers, ITC reversed and reclaimed due to non-payment within 180 days, ITC claimed for goods not received, invoices belonging to the prev

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Advisory on difference in value of Table 8A and 8C of Annual Returns FY 23-24
GST
Dated:- 10-12-2024

As per the Notification No 12/2024 Central Tax dated 10th July 2024 read with Notification No.20/2024-Central Tax Dated 8th October 2024, for FY 2023-24 onwards, the total credit available for inwards supplies shall be auto-populated in the table 8A of Form GSTR 9 from GSTR-2B of the FY 23-24. Further, in table 8C of Form GSTR-9 total value of ITC on inwards supplies received during the FY but availed in next FY up to specified period, need to be filled manually.
2. Various tickets are received, wherein concerns have been raised regarding possible mismatch between the values of table 8A and 8C of Form GSTR-9 for FY 23-24. It i

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

is the part of next years GSTR 2B. How to report such transaction in the GSTR 9 of FY 23-24?
Taxpayer shall report such ITC in the Table 8C and in Table 13 as this is the ITC of FY 2023-24. This is in line with the instructions to the Table 8C and Table 13 of GSTR 9
2
Invoice belongs to FY 23-24 and ITC has been claimed in FY 23-24. Due to payment not made to supplier within 180 days, ITC was reversed in 23-24 as per the second proviso to section 16(2) and this ITC is reclaimed in next Year FY 2024-25, after making the payment to supplier. How to report such transaction in the GSTR 9 of FY 23-24?
This reclaimed ITC shall be reported in the table 6H of GSTR 9 for FY 24-25 hence not in the Table 8C and Table 13 of GSTR 9 of FY 2023-24

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ing of GSTR-1 for the tax period of March 23. How to report such transaction in the GSTR 9 of FY 23-24?
This is the ITC of last year (2022-23) and was auto populated in table 8A of GSTR-9 of FY 22-23. Hence, aforesaid value need not to be reported in the table 8C and Table 13 of GSTR-9 for FY 23-24. This is in line with the instruction no 2A given for the notified form GSTR 9 which states that Table 4,5,6 and Table 7 should have the details of current FY only
5
Where to report the reclaim of ITC for an Invoice which belongs to FY 2023-24, and which is claimed, reversed and reclaimed in the same year?
As already clarified by the CBIC press release 3rd July 2019 in the para k, It may be noted that the label in Table 6H clearly states th

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Advisory for Biometric-Based Aadhaar Authentication and Document Verification for GST Registration Applicants of Haryana, Manipur, Meghalaya and Tripura
GST
Dated:- 10-12-2024

Dear Taxpayers,
This is to inform taxpayers about recent developments concerning the application process for GST registration. It is advised to keep the following key points in mind during the registration process.
1.Rule 8 of the CGST Rules, 2017 has been amended to provide that an applicant can be identified on the common portal, based on data analysis and risk parameters for Biometric-based Aadhaar Authentication and taking a photograph of the applicant along with the verification of the original copy of the documents uploaded with the application.

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ioned in point 3(a), she/he can proceed with the application as per the existing process.
5.However, if the applicant receives the link as mentioned in point 3(b), she/he will be required to book the appointment to visit the designated GSK, using the link provided in the e-mail.
6. The feature of booking an appointment to visit a designated GSK is now available for the applicants of Haryana, Manipur, Meghalaya and Tripura.
7. After booking the appointment, the applicant gets the confirmation of appointment through e-mail (the appointment confirmation e-mail), she/he will be able to visit the designated GSK as per the chosen schedule.
8.At the time of the visit of GSK, the applicant is required to carry the following details/documents
(

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Transitional CENVAT credit allowed despite pending show-cause notice under GST regime.
Case-Laws
GST
The High Court allowed the petitioner's writ petition and set aside the impugned order denying transition of CENVAT credit of Rs.1,39,31,604/- u/s 140(1) of the CGST Act. The court held that mere issuance of a show-cause notice, subsequently kept in abeyance, cannot disentitle the petitioner from claiming transition of the available CENVAT credit as on 30.06.2017 to the GST regime. The C

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

High Court allows Input Tax Credit claim despite e-way bill mismatch; directs to pay remaining tax within 2 weeks.
Case-Laws
GST
The High Court set aside the impugned order rejecting the petitioner's claim of Input Tax Credit (ITC) u/s 16(4) of the GST Act due to a discrepancy between the e-way bill and GSTR-3B. The petitioner was directed to deposit the entire tax due of Rs. 87,129/- on issues other than the rejection of ITC invoking Section 16(4) within two weeks from the receipt of t

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

High Court Allows Retrospective GST Refunds; Rules Amendment to Refund Formula Clarificatory, Dismissing Prospective Limits.
Case-Laws
GST
The High Court allowed the petition and quashed the impugned order rejecting the petitioner's refund application for unutilized input tax credit. The court held that the Notification No. 14/2022 amending Rule 89(5) of the GST Rules is clarificatory and curative in nature, rectifying the anomaly in the refund formula. Relying on Supreme Court preceden

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Charitable institution's income prima facie not taxable under CGST Act for lack of business activities.
Case-Laws
GST
The High Court prima facie held that the income of the petitioner, a charitable institution registered u/s 12AA of the Income Tax Act, 1961, cannot be assessed to tax under the Central Goods & Services Tax Act, 2017 (CGST Act). The activities undertaken by a charitable institution would not prima facie fall within the ambit of activities undertaken in the course of or in

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Case-Laws – GST – Highlights – The High Court held that the negative blocking of the Electronic Credit Ledger (ECL) of the writ petitioner by the respondents, purportedly exercising powers u/r 86A of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017, cannot be sustained. The issue of negative blocking stands conclusively decided in favor of the writ petitioner in light of the judgment in Best Crop Science Pvt. Ltd. v. Principal Commissioner, where it was held that orders disallowing debit from the ECL in excess of the available Input Tax Credit at the time of passing such orders (referred to as Negative blocking) are set aside. Consequently, the petition was allowed. – 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

= = = = = = = =

Tax Authority's Negative Blocking of Taxpayer's Credit Ledger Struck Down.
Case-Laws
GST
The High Court held that the negative blocking of the Electronic Credit Ledger (ECL) of the writ petitioner by the respondents, purportedly exercising powers u/r 86A of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017, cannot be sustained. The issue of negative blocking stands conclusively decided in favor of the writ petitioner in light of the judgment in Best Crop Science Pvt. Ltd. v. Principal Comm

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Taxpayer's plea dismissed; instructed to appeal against assessment order to Appellate Authority.
Case-Laws
GST
The High Court dismissed the petition on the ground of availability of an alternative statutory remedy of appeal against the assessment order. The petitioner challenged the assessment order citing limitation and violation of principles of natural justice. However, the Court held that whether the extended period of limitation applies and principles of natural justice were violat

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Insurance premium & reinsurance commission not 'supply' – Refund due on deposits made pending litigation.
Case-Laws
GST
The High Court held that the co-insurance premium and reinsurance commission would not be considered as supply and thus, the petitioners are entitled to a refund. The amounts deposited by the petitioner were not towards discharge of tax liability, but merely deposits pursuant to the court's order pending final adjudication. Since the utilization of these amounts for ta

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Improper revival of tax proceedings after initial satisfaction violates natural justice principles.
Case-Laws
GST
The High Court held that the proceedings initiated u/s 74 of the CGST Act, 2017 were vitiated as the Proper Officer had previously dropped the proceedings u/s 61(2) after finding the reply satisfactory. Initiating proceedings u/s 74 after dropping Section 61 proceedings violated the principles of natural justice. Consequently, the High Court quashed the order dated 14.06.202

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =