Author: admin_gst

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

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Advisory on Table-12 of GSTR-1 or GSTR-1A
GST
Dated:- 11-4-2025

It to inform that GSTN has implemented phase wise changes in Table-12 of GSTR-1 or GSTR-1A. For the same various advisories have been issued time to time, which are available on GST Portal. GSTN is going to implement Phase-III of Table 12 of GSTR 1 & 1A from April, 2025 tax period onwards. Which implies:
(1). Table-12 has been bifurcated into two tables namely B2B and B2C, to report these summary of these sup

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Tax Transfer Dispute Resolved: No Evasion Found in Machine Movement Between Units with Proper Documentation Validated
Case-Laws
GST
HC adjudicated a tax seizure case involving inter-unit transportation of goods. The court determined that no tax evasion occurred during the transfer of a compactor machine from Rajasthan to Uttar Pradesh. Despite initial interception due to missing documentation, the subsequent production of delivery challan and e-way bill demonstrated compliance. The court emphasized that stock transfers between organizational units without a sales transaction do not attract GST liability. Critically, the respondent authority failed to establish any deliberate intent to circumvent tax regulations. Relying on precedential reasoning, the HC ruled that procedural technicalities did not warrant punitive action. The petition was ultimately allowed, nullifying the seizure proceedings under Section 129 of the CGST Act.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Judicial Review Exposes Procedural Gaps in Tax Penalty Application, Mandates Comprehensive Reasoning Under Section 74 CGST Act
Case-Laws
GST
HC allowed the petition, finding a violation of natural justice due to lack of proper application of mind by the respondent authority under Section 74 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The court directed the Commissioner to review orders lacking substantive reasoning for invoking fraud provisions, specifically mandating explicit documentation of willful misstatement or material fact suppression. The judicial intervention emphasized procedural integrity by requiring comprehensive rationale when applying statutory penalties, effectively remanding the matter for comprehensive reconsideration and appropriate administrative action.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Writ Petition Dismissed: Show Cause Notice Upheld Due to Petitioner's Non-Appearance and Availability of Alternative Remedy
Case-Laws
GST
HC dismissed the writ petition challenging a show cause notice, finding no violation of natural justice principles. The court determined that the petitioner failed to appear on the scheduled hearing date despite prior opportunities, and had an alternative remedy of filing an appeal under Section 107. The order was deemed valid as the competent authority reviewed submitted documents and responses. The petitioner's claim of procedural impropriety was rejected due to non-appearance and lack of substantive evidence supporting the allegation of prejudice.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Judicial Review Finds Demand Order Defective, Mandates Procedural Correction and Fair Hearing for Petitioner Under Section 75(6)
Case-Laws
GST
HC determined that the undated demand order was procedurally defective under Section 75(6), lacking substantive reasoning beyond referencing a show cause notice. The court remanded the matter to the respondent, directing them to provide the petitioner an opportunity to respond to the original show cause notice within four weeks. Following the petitioner's response, the respondent must conduct a hearing and issue a legally compliant order. The petition was allowed through judicial remand, requiring procedural rectification of the original administrative action.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Procedural Flaws Invalidate Tax Notice: Lack of Natural Justice Principles Leads to Quashing of Summary Order
Case-Laws
GST
HC set aside the summary of show cause notice and summary of order due to violation of principles of natural justice. The court found that issuing summaries without proper show cause notice under Section 73(1) and order under Section 73(9) of CGST Act, 2017 was procedurally incorrect. Following the precedent in Construction Catalysers Pvt. Ltd., the court determined that summary documents do not substitute formal legal notices and orders, which must be authenticated as per Rule 26(3) of the 2017 Rules. The petitioner was not provided adequate opportunity of hearing, rendering the proceedings invalid.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST Assessment Order Invalidated for Procedural Violations, Demand of Rs. 19.8 Lakh Quashed Under Section 62
Case-Laws
GST
HC held the assessment order under GST Act section 62 invalid due to procedural irregularities. The order creating a demand of Rs. 19,80,000 was passed without prior notice under section 46, violating principles of natural justice. The court found serious procedural defects in the assessment process, rendering the order unsustainable. Following precedent from a similar Jharkhand HC case, the court remitted the matter to the Deputy Commissioner to reconsider and issue a fresh notice to the petitioner within two weeks, effectively allowing the petition and setting aside the impugned orders.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Judicial Order Permits Conditional Release of Truck and Areca-nut Cargo After Deposit of Specified Amount
Case-Laws
GST
HC declined interim relief, directing respondent authorities to release a TATA truck transporting 17,760 kg of Areca-nuts upon payment of Rs. 100,000. Regarding the goods, the court mandated selling 222 bags (80 kg each) within 15 days at best possible price, with proceeds retained in a separate account pending writ petition outcome. The appellant was permitted to participate in auction proceedings. Vehicle release was conditioned on payment, and goods sale was ordered to prevent potential deterioration and ensure preservation of value.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Tax Refund Claim Validated: Department Must Process Refund When No Appeal Challenges Appellate Authority's Order Under Section 54(11)
Case-Laws
GST
HC upheld the refund claim, ruling that the tax department cannot withhold the refund based solely on Section 54(11) opinion when no appeal challenges the Appellate Authority's order. The court emphasized that in the absence of a stay or pending review, the refund must be processed. The decision aligns with precedent that an administrative opinion cannot override a valid appellate order, particularly when no legal challenge exists. The refund shall be processed with potential interest for delayed payment, with the understanding that any future successful appeal would retrospectively bind the parties.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Land Acquisition Compensation Exempt from GST: Solatium Payments Ruled Non-Taxable Under Service Supply Regulations
Case-Laws
GST
HC held that compensation paid as solatium for land acquisition is not subject to GST under CGST/KGST Act. The court determined that sale of land and immovable property falls outside GST taxation, even without specific schedule exemptions. The compensation does not constitute a service supply with consideration, and the conditions in land acquisition agreements do not trigger GST liability. The court emphasized that governmental land acquisition payments are not taxable transactions, and the impugned notices were deemed illegal and without legal jurisdiction. Petition was consequently allowed, quashing GST levy on land acquisition compensation.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST Registration Cancellation Overturned: Procedural Flaws and Lack of Reasoned Order Invalidate Administrative Action
Case-Laws
GST
HC allowed the petition challenging GST registration cancellation, finding the impugned order non-compliant with procedural requirements. The order was deemed arbitrary and passed without due application of mind, violating principles of natural justice. Specifically, the cancellation order failed to provide a speaking order with substantive reasoning as mandated under CGST Act and Rules, despite the petitioner's non-response to show cause notice. The court held that absence of reasoned explanation renders the administrative action invalid, thereby quashing the registration cancellation order.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Appeal Reinstated: Authorized Signatory Validated, Procedural Fairness Restored, Previous Order Set Aside for Fresh Consideration
Case-Laws
GST
HC allowed the petitioner's appeal, finding that the authorized signatory was valid and the previous dismissal violated principles of natural justice. The court set aside the impugned order dated 30th July 2024 and directed Respondent No.2 to restore the appeal to the file for fresh consideration on merits, ensuring procedural fairness and opportunity to be heard.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =