Author: admin_gst

Summary SCN and Order Without Hearing Violates Natural Justice Under Section 73(1) of CGST Act
Case-Laws
GST
The HC held that issuance of a summary of show cause notice (SCN) and summary of order without issuing a formal SCN under section 73(1) of the CGST Act, 2017, violated principles of natural justice by denying the petitioner an opportunity of hearing. Relying on precedent from Construction Catalysers Pvt. Ltd., the court found that an adverse order cannot be passed without affording the petitioner a chance to be heard. Consequently, the HC set aside the summary SCN dated 12.12.2023 and the summary order dated 22.04.2024. The writ petition was disposed of accordingly, reaffirming the necessity of adherence to procedural fairness before passing orders under the CGST Act.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

No GST Claims Allowed Against Resolution Applicant After Plan Approval Under Section 73 CGST Act
Case-Laws
GST
The HC held that once a resolution plan is approved by the NCLT, no further claims or liabilities, including GST demands, can be raised against the resolution applicant, as doing so violates the fundamental principles of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code designed to provide a fresh start. The Court quashed the impugned assessment order under Section 73 of the CGST/UPGST Act, 2017 for the 2017-18 tax period and the show cause notice under the same provision for 2018-19, emphasizing that post-approval claims disrupt the resolution process and are illegal. Consequently, the petition was allowed, barring the recovery of GST dues after the resolution plan's sanction.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Bail Granted Under Sections 132(1)(a), (b), (c), (i), and 132(5) of Rajasthan GST Act with Personal Bond Conditions
Case-Laws
GST
The HC granted bail to the accused-petitioner arrested under Sections 132(1)(a), (b), (c), 132(1)(i), and 132(5) of the Rajasthan Goods and Services Act, 2017, offenses punishable up to five years. The petitioner, in custody since April 4, 2025, with a charge-sheet filed and no prior similar criminal record, was released considering the likelihood of prolonged trial and relevant Supreme Court precedents. Bail was conditioned on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 100,000 with two sureties of Rs. 50,000 each, ensuring the petitioner's cooperation and attendance at all trial proceedings.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Order quashed for denying personal hearing under Section 75(4) of MPGST Act, violating natural justice principles
Case-Laws
GST
The HC held that the impugned order dated 09.06.2023 was cryptic, non-speaking, and passed without application of mind, violating the principles of natural justice by denying the petitioners a mandatory personal hearing as required under Section 75(4) of the MPGST Act. This procedural lapse constituted an apparent error of law, vitiating the proceedings. Consequently, the HC quashed the impugned order and remanded the matter to the authority for a de novo decision after affording the petitioners the opportunity of personal hearing. The petitions were allowed on this basis.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Court upholds Section 16(2)(c) CGST/SGST, grants one-month extension for input tax credit claims and error corrections
Case-Laws
GST
The HC dismissed the writ appeal challenging Section 16(2)(c) of the CGST/SGST Act, which requires an assessee claiming input tax credit to ensure the supplier has paid the output tax. However, the court extended the time granted by the Single Judge by one month for the appellant to claim benefits under two specified circulars and to raise additional issues related to errors in Form GSTR-3B before the adjudicating authority. If the appellant approaches the assessing authority within this extended period highlighting the irregularities, the authority must consider the application under the liberty granted and adjudicate expeditiously. The remainder of the Single Judge's findings were upheld, and the writ appeal was disposed of accordingly.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Regular Bail Allowed in Fraudulent ITC Case Under Economic Offences Rules, No Custodial Risk Found
Case-Laws
GST
The HC granted regular bail to the accused charged with availing and passing on fraudulent ITC through bogus supplies, emphasizing that bail is generally the rule in economic offences and its refusal the exception. The Court rejected a blanket denial of bail for grave economic offences, noting the maximum prescribed sentence was five years. Given the documentary and electronic nature of evidence and absence of custodial interrogation, the Court found no risk of witness tampering or influence. Balancing the circumstances, bail was allowed subject to furnishing personal bonds with two sureties of like amount to the satisfaction of the concerned Court or Duty Magistrate. The petition for bail was accordingly allowed.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Dismissal of Section 161 Rectification Petition Is Not Rectification, No Hearing Required Before Dismissal
Case-Laws
GST
The HC held that an order dismissing a rectification application under Section 161 of the TNGST Act, 2017, is an adverse decision but does not constitute rectification requiring adherence to natural justice principles. The third proviso to Section 161 applies only when a positive rectification is made that affects a person. If the rectification petition is dismissed without alteration of the original order, no rectification occurs, and thus, the principles of natural justice, including the right to a personal hearing, are not triggered. The Court affirmed that refusal to rectify is not equivalent to rectification under the statute. Consequently, there is no statutory obligation to grant a hearing before dismissing a rectification petition. The Single Judge's order dismissing the appeal was upheld.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Rule 86A(3) ITC Block Lifted After 10% Deposit and Timely Appeal Under Section 107 TNGST Act
Case-Laws
GST
The HC directed the respondents to unblock the petitioner's Input Tax Credit (ITC) previously blocked under Rule 86A of the CGST Rules. The Court held that the restriction under Rule 86A(3) ceases upon the petitioner depositing 10% of the disputed tax amount and filing an appeal within the statutory period prescribed under Section 107 of the TNGST Act. Failure to file the appeal within this period would authorize the respondents to re-block the unutilized ITC. Consequently, the petition was disposed of with a mandate to unblock the ITC amounts blocked on specific dates, subject to the petitioner meeting the deposit and appeal conditions.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Registration cancellation quashed for violating natural justice and Article 14 due to no hearing and improper order.
Case-Laws
GST
The HC held that the cancellation of the petitioner's registration was invalid due to violation of natural justice, specifically the failure to grant an opportunity of hearing and non-application of mind. Despite the petitioner submitting a reply, the order incorrectly stated no reply was received, indicating a lack of proper consideration. The court found the impugned order arbitrary and not meeting the standards of Article 14 of the Constitution. Consequently, the HC quashed the cancellation order and allowed the petition.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Secured creditors have priority under Section 26E SARFAESI Act over CGST dues for asset recovery
Case-Laws
GST
The HC held that under Section 26E of the SARFAESI Act, the secured creditor possesses priority over the secured asset concerning recovery of dues. Since the secured creditor had not taken possession of the property, the CGST authorities were justified in attaching the asset. Despite the admitted outstanding dues owed to both the CGST authorities and the secured creditor, the court allowed the secured creditor to proceed with enforcement against the secured asset. The ruling clarified that the CGST authorities' right to recover dues is subordinate to the secured creditor's interests, who must maintain transparent accounting and share transaction details with the CGST authorities. The court referred to established precedent confirming that statutory dues under other enactments, such as the MSMED Act, do not confer similar priority rights. The petition was accordingly disposed of.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Refund of input tax credit limited to tax rate on principal input under Section 54(3)(ii) and Circular 135/05/2020
Case-Laws
GST
The HC held that the refund of input tax credit is limited to the tax rate applicable on the principal input, specifically crude sunflower oil. Relying on precedent, the Court affirmed that Circular No. 135/05/2020 applies only where input tax credit accumulation arises from a reduction in tax rates. The Court further concluded that the petitioner is not entitled to a refund under Clause (ii) of Sub-section (3) of Section 54 when the input and output supplies are identical. This interpretation aligns with the legal principles established in a prior HC ruling involving a similar issue. Consequently, the petition was allowed, confirming that refund claims must adhere strictly to the statutory and circular provisions governing input tax credit refunds.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Ex-Parte Assessment Order Quashed for Violating Natural Justice Under Section 75(4) BGST Act 2017
Case-Laws
GST
The HC held that the impugned ex-parte assessment order violated principles of natural justice due to non-compliance with Section 75(4) of the BGST Act, 2017, as no opportunity for personal hearing was granted. The show cause notice failed to specify the date, time, and venue for personal hearing, which is mandatory and cannot be left to the petitioner to choose. Additionally, mere uploading of proceedings on the portal without serving notice through at least two prescribed modes under Section 169 was held insufficient. The court set aside the impugned actions and directed the competent authority to schedule a personal hearing with proper notice specifying date, time, and venue, ensuring adherence to statutory procedural safeguards. The petition was allowed accordingly.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Writ Petition Dismissed on GST Registration Cancellation Under Section 73; Appeal Allowed for Interest and Penalty Issues
Case-Laws
GST
The HC dismissed the writ petition challenging the cancellation of registration under section 73 of the GST Act, 2017. The court held that the petitioner's admission and payment of the tax demand precluded relief on that ground. However, issues regarding interest and penalty may be contested through an appeal under section 107 of the Act, as no justification was shown for bypassing this statutory remedy. The petitioner was permitted to pursue such an appeal in accordance with law.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Orders invalidated due to missing signatures on DRC-07, mandatory under statutory execution rules
Case-Laws
GST
The HC held that the impugned orders were vitiated due to the absence of signatures on the DRC-07 document, which is a statutory requirement. The court emphasized that when a statute prescribes a specific mode of execution, compliance with that mode is mandatory, and any deviation renders the act invalid. The lack of signatures on DRC-01 and DRC-07 could not be overridden by explanations in the counter affidavit or notes. Consequently, the petition challenging the orders was disposed of in favor of the petitioner, affirming that non-compliance with statutory formalities invalidates the impugned orders.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Petition Dismissed for Bypassing Mandatory Pre-Deposit Requirement Under Article 226 Jurisdiction
Case-Laws
GST
The HC dismissed the petition, emphasizing the availability of an alternative and efficacious statutory remedy which the petitioner failed to utilize. The court held that the petitioner's attempt to circumvent the mandatory pre-deposit requirement for instituting an appeal was unjustified. The HC reaffirmed the principle that extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 cannot be exercised to bypass prescribed statutory procedures unless stringent conditions, as established by precedent, are met. The decision aligns with the SC's recent stance that statutory remedies should not be circumvented through constitutional petitions, thereby upholding the integrity of the statutory appeal process.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Failure to allow cross-examination under CGST Act violates natural justice, tax and penalty set aside, case remanded
Case-Laws
GST
The HC held that the failure to provide the petitioner the opportunity to cross-examine witnesses whose statements were relied upon under the CGST Act violated the principles of natural justice. Cross-examination, as mandated by the Evidence Act and affirmed by the Apex Court, is integral to ensuring a fair hearing. Consequently, the court set aside the levy of tax and penalty and remanded the matter back to the authority for further proceedings, specifically directing that cross-examination be allowed. The writ petition was disposed of accordingly.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Writ Petition Dismissed; Appeal Allowed with Pre-Deposit Under Section 107 of GST Act Within 15 Days
Case-Laws
GST
The HC dismissed the writ petition for lacking prima facie merit. However, the petitioner was granted leave to file an appeal before the Appellate Commissioner within 15 days of receiving the order, subject to making the applicable pre-deposit as mandated by Section 107 of the GST Act. Upon compliance, the Appellate Commissioner was directed to adjudicate the appeal on its merits in due course. The writ petition was accordingly dismissed.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Petition Dismissed on Tax Demand; No Natural Justice Violation Found, Alternative Remedy Available Under Law
Case-Laws
GST
The HC dismissed the petition challenging the impugned order demanding tax, interest, and penalty, holding that the Assessing Authority had duly considered the appellant's reply and provided an opportunity of hearing prior to issuance. The court found no violation of natural justice principles, rejecting the appellant's contention that the order was passed without due process. The appellant was found to have an alternative efficacious remedy and was granted liberty to file an appeal before the designated appellate authority within 30 days of receipt of the order. The appellate authority was directed to adjudicate the appeal in accordance with law within a reasonable timeframe, without raising limitation objections. Consequently, the writ petition was dismissed for lack of merit.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Appeal Dismissed for Delay Without Considering Section 14 Exclusion; Audit Held Arbitrary and Quashed
Case-Laws
GST
The HC dismissed the petitioner's appeal under Section 107(1) of the CGST Act, 2017 solely on the ground of delay without accounting for the time excluded under Section 14 of the Limitation Act, constituting an erroneous exercise of jurisdiction. Consequently, the appellate order was quashed and the matter remanded for fresh consideration in accordance with law, allowing the petitioner the benefit of exclusion under Section 14. Additionally, the concurrent adjudication by the Assistant Commissioner (in conducting Audit) despite the pendency of appeal proceedings was held to be arbitrary and unsustainable, violating principles of natural justice and judicial discipline. The order passed by the Assistant Commissioner was quashed. Petition allowed.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Directive mandates timely record production for audits under Goa GST Act, 2017, per Article 149 compliance rules
Circulars
GST – States
The State Tax Commissioner issued a directive enforcing the timely production of records and information for audit purposes under the Goa GST Act, 2017, following an instruction from the CBIC. This directive mandates all officers to promptly provide requisite documents to the C&AG audit teams to facilitate statutory audits, as empowered by Article 149 of the Constitution. Non-compliance noted in prior audits necessitated this uniform implementation. Officers must also coordinate with taxpayers to obtain documents not held within government records. The instruction aims to ensure transparency and accountability in government revenue administration by obligating field formations to cooperate fully with audit authorities. Failure to comply may result in administrative consequences, underscoring the legal obligation to support audit functions under the applicable GST framework.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

New grievance process for GST registration issues under state tax rules ensures faster resolution and reporting
Circulars
GST – States
The Commissioner of State Taxes, Goa, instituted a grievance redressal mechanism for applicants facing issues with GST registration processing under state jurisdiction. Applicants dissatisfied with queries or grounds for rejection may file grievances via a designated email to the Additional Commissioner of State Tax (HQ), who is tasked with ensuring timely resolution and communication of outcomes. Complaints concerning central jurisdiction are to be forwarded to the appropriate central authority with notification to the GST Council Secretariat. The Additional Commissioner must also submit monthly reports on grievance handling to the Commissioner. This framework aims to expedite dispute resolution and maintain procedural compliance in GST registration applications within the state.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Small traders get relief as Chhattisgarh govt waives VAT dues of up to Rs 25k in old cases
GST
Dated:- 12-7-2025
PTI
Raipur, Jul 12 (PTI) Small traders can heave a sigh of relief as the Chhattisgarh government has decided to waive VAT dues of up to Rs 25,000 in cases pending for more than 10 years, officials said on Saturday.
The move to write off old VAT dues is expected to benefit more than 40,000 traders and will help reduce litigation in more than 62,000 cases, significantly easing the compliance burden, they pointed out.
Simultaneously, multiple amendments to GST (Goods and Service Tax) provisions will also be introduced under the broader agenda of improving the business climate in the state, they said.
During the cabine

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

r cent, providing much-needed relief to the business community,” it said.
“In an effort to bring uniformity, the provision related to 'Time of Supply' has been deleted with respect to taxability on vouchers, as there were conflicting views among various Advance Ruling Authorities on the matter. This amendment aims to bring clarity and consistency,” as per the release.
Additionally, a key amendment has been proposed to exclude SEZ warehousing transactions from the GST ambit, the release informed.
These involve goods kept in Special Economic Zone (SEZ) warehouses, which may be traded multiple times without any physical movement, the release said, adding the change is aimed at boosting trade activities in SEZs. PTI TKP BNM
News – Press

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Maharashtra bars, permit rooms declare bandh on July 14 to protest tax hikes
GST
Dated:- 12-7-2025
PTI
Mumbai, Jul 12 (PTI) Over 20,000 bars and permit rooms across Maharashtra will shut operations on July 14 to protest against the state government’s “draconian taxation”, said the Indian Hotel and Restaurant Association (AHAR) on Saturday.
The bandh is to oppose the state governmentÂ’s tax hikes, including rise in VAT (value added tax) on liquor to 10 per cent, a 15 per cent increase in annual licence fees and a 60 per cent spike in excise duty, in a span of one year, AHAR said in a statement.
These tax hikes are pushing the Rs 1.5 lakh-crore industry to the edge of collapse, it said.
“The entire hospitality sector in Maharash

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

a death blow to an industry that contributes significantly to employment and state taxes,” said Shetty.
The 20,000-strong permit rooms and bars industry directly and indirectly employs over 20 lakh jobs, and supports a wider ecosystem of 48,000 vendors.
National Restaurant Association of India (NRAI), Hotel and Restaurant Association (Western India) – HRAWI, and affiliated as well as non-affiliated associations of hotels and restaurants in Maharashtra have extended their support to the July 14 bandh.
The industry also plays a vital role in MaharashtraÂ’s tourism-driven economy, especially in cities like Mumbai and Pune, they said.
“We stand united with our fraternity members across Maharashtra in expressing our deep concern over these r

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Mandatory deficiency notice under Rule 90(3) CGST excludes limitation period; right to appeal preserved under Section 107
Case-Laws
GST
The HC held that under Rule 90(3) of the CGST Rules, deficiency communication via Form GST RFD-03 is mandatory, and the period of deficiency communication is excluded from the two-year limitation under Section 54(1). In the case at hand, the Department claimed issuance of an SCN and rejection without reply, but the petitioner contended non-receipt or non-uploading of the SCN and rejection order, resulting in denial of the right to be heard. Since the final rejection order dated 2019 was only disclosed to the petitioner in 2025, the court allowed the petitioner to file an appeal before the Appellate Authority under Section 107. The Department's inability to produce the deficiency memo (Form GST RFD-03) undermined its justification to withhold the refund. The petition was accordingly disposed of, preserving the petitioner's right to challenge the refund rejection.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Order set aside for violating natural justice by denying mandatory third personal hearing under relevant provisions
Case-Laws
GST
The HC found that the first respondent violated the principles of natural justice by passing the impugned order without granting the petitioner the mandatory third personal hearing as required under the relevant provisions. The petitioner had submitted a reply and requested an opportunity for a third hearing and to produce records, which was not afforded. Consequently, the HC set aside the impugned order and remitted the matter to the first respondent with a direction to provide the petitioner a personal hearing on 24-12-2024. The first respondent is to consider the petitioner's submissions and documents and pass a reasoned order on merits in accordance with law. The petition was disposed of accordingly.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =