Author: admin_gst

Legal Clarity on WBGST Act Section 128A: Tax Payment Eligibility and Dispute Resolution Mechanism for Taxpayers
Circulars
GST – States
The Trade Circular addresses key interpretative issues regarding Section 128A of the WBGST Act, 2017, clarifying two primary concerns: (1) taxpayers who paid taxes through FORM GSTR-3B prior to 1st November 2024 remain eligible for benefits under Section 128A, subject to proper officer verification; and (2) for notices/orders spanning periods partially within and outside Section 128A's scope, taxpayers may file FORM SPL-01/SPL-02 after paying tax liability for covered periods, with appellate authorities empowered to adjudicate remaining periods independently, thereby providing a flexible mechanism for resolving complex tax dispute scenarios while maintaining procedural compliance.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST Registration License Cancellation Overturned Due to Procedural Gaps in Verification Process Under Rule 25
Case-Laws
GST
HC held that GST registration license cancellation was improper due to procedural irregularities. The visit note by the CGST Superintendent lacked corroborative evidence, as no additional witnesses were present during the physical verification. The officer failed to record statements from nearby shop owners and obtain their signatures, rendering the verification process fundamentally flawed. The subsequent administrative orders at different levels were found unsustainable, primarily because the initial verification was conducted without proper protocol. The court emphasized the importance of following Rule 25 of GST Rules 2017, which mandates comprehensive documentation and witness verification during business premise inspections. Consequently, the petitioner's license cancellation was quashed, and the administrative orders were set aside.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Landmark GST Cancellation Ruling: Procedural Fairness Prevails, Order Quashed for Lack of Substantive Reasoning
Case-Laws
GST
HC allowed the writ petition challenging the rejection of a voluntary GST cancellation application. The court found the original order defective due to lack of reasoned explanation, violating principles of natural justice. The impugned order dated 20 November 2024 was quashed, directing the competent authority to reconsider the cancellation application afresh and dispose of it in accordance with legal principles, ensuring procedural fairness and providing substantive reasoning for any subsequent decision.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Ex Parte Tax Assessment Invalidated: Procedural Defect in Notice Service Violates Natural Justice Principles, Order Set Aside
Case-Laws
GST
HC set aside ex parte assessment order due to violation of natural justice principles. The order was passed without proper service of show cause notice, as notices were uploaded in an obscure portal column rendering them effectively unnoticed by the petitioner. The Deputy Commissioner's rejection of appeal on limitation grounds was overruled. The HC remanded the matter for fresh consideration, with the petitioner willing to pay 15% of disputed tax. The procedural defect in service of notice fundamentally invalidated the original assessment, ensuring the petitioner's right to fair hearing was reinstated.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Legal Proceedings Against Deceased Person Invalidated: Show Cause Notice Quashed Due to Procedural Irregularities Under Rule
Case-Laws
GST
HC ruled that proceedings initiated against a deceased person are legally invalid. The show cause notice and subsequent order issued to the deceased proprietor were procedurally incorrect, as legal proceedings cannot be commenced against a deceased individual. The court held that while authorities may proceed against legal representatives, the existing proceedings were fundamentally flawed. The writ petition challenging the notice was consequently allowed, rendering the entire proceeding from the show cause notice stage null and void. The decision emphasizes the principle that legal actions must be directed appropriately and cannot be sustained against a deceased person's estate without proper legal representation.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Legal Victory: Tax Evasion Arrest Upheld, Bail Granted After Careful Review of Procedural Compliance and Cooperation
Case-Laws
GST
DSC ruling on petitioner's lawful arrest in tax evasion matter. Despite allegations of procedural irregularities, court found arrest memo valid, with proper grounds explained to accused and her father. Authorization order under Section 69 was signed by accused and witnesses. Court determined further judicial custody unnecessary, noting revenue adequately secured and accused's willingness to cooperate. Considering gender and nature of offense, bail application granted, allowing petitioner's release, with understanding that investigation may continue. Arrest deemed legally sound, but continued detention deemed unwarranted.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST Exemption for Rice Milling By-Products: Conversion Charges and Estimated Value Not Considered Taxable Consideration
Case-Laws
GST
HC ruled that GST cannot be levied on the value of by-products (broken rice, husk, and bran) generated during paddy milling for public distribution system (PDS). The court applied precedent from a prior case (Shiridi Sainath Industries) and determined that the conversion charges and estimated value of by-products do not constitute taxable consideration. The impugned assessment orders dated 25.10.2024 and 24.10.2024 were consequently set aside, effectively exempting the milling service provider from GST on retained by-products.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Tax Appeal Dismissed: Strict Adherence to Limitation Period Bars Judicial Review Under Statutory Remedy Provisions
Case-Laws
GST
HC dismissed the writ petition challenging tax assessment orders, finding the appeal time-barred under the 2017 Act. The appellate authority correctly rejected the appeal filed beyond the prescribed limitation period, with no power to condone delay beyond one month. Relying on Supreme Court precedent, the HC held that where statutory remedy is foreclosed by limitation, judicial review under Article 226 is impermissible. The petitioner failed to demonstrate jurisdictional error or violation of natural justice principles, resulting in outright dismissal of the petition.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Interim Relief Granted: Tax Notifications Challenged on Natural Justice Grounds, Coercive Actions Restrained
Case-Laws
GST
HC granted interim relief to petitioner challenging tax notifications, restraining respondents from taking coercive action. The court found a prima facie case of violation of natural justice principles due to non-service of show cause notice and denial of personal hearing. Multiple high courts have divergent views on the validity of the notifications, with some striking them down and others upholding them. The Supreme Court is currently adjudicating related matters. Interim protection was granted, directing respondents not to take adverse actions against the petitioner pending final resolution of the legal issues.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Legal Challenge Succeeds: GST Seizure Invalidated Due to Lack of Substantive Evidence and Procedural Gaps
Case-Laws
GST
HC allowed the petition challenging goods seizure during transit. The court found no legal basis for seizure under GST Act, as authorities failed to establish tax evasion intent or document discrepancies. The goods were being transported from Meerut to Kanpur, intercepted at Basti solely due to an alternate route, without any substantive evidence of procedural violations. The court emphasized that absent specific statutory provisions mandating route declaration, the seizure was unwarranted. All accompanying documents were verified as genuine in quality and quantity, further invalidating the administrative action. The ruling underscores procedural propriety and protects taxpayer rights against arbitrary administrative interventions.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST Appellate Tribunal Procedure Rules 2025 Streamline Dispute Resolution with Electronic Filing and Clear Judicial Protocols
Notifications
GST
The GSTAT Procedure Rules, 2025 comprehensively regulate the procedural framework for the Goods and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal, establishing comprehensive guidelines for filing appeals, conducting hearings, maintaining records, and managing tribunal proceedings. Key provisions include electronic filing mechanisms, detailed procedural requirements for appeals, standards for document submission, rules governing authorized representatives, and protocols for case disposal. The rules emphasize transparency, efficiency, and structured judicial processes, providing a systematic approach to resolving GST-related disputes through a specialized appellate mechanism with clearly defined operational parameters.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST Assessment Order Valid: Statutory Time Limit Extended Through Government Notifications for Fiscal Year 2017-18
Case-Laws
GST
HC held that the assessment order dated 13.12.2023 was not time-barred due to successive government notifications extending the statutory time limit for GST assessment proceedings for FY 2017-18. Specifically, notifications dated 21.07.2022 and 24.04.2023 extended the time limit to 31.12.2023, rendering the impugned order legally valid. Since the order was passed within the extended timeline and the notifications were not challenged, the writ petition was deemed non-maintainable, with the statutory remedy of appeal being the appropriate recourse. Consequently, the HC dismissed the petition.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Taxpayer Challenge Rejected: Rule 86A(1)(a) Upholds ITC Blocking with Procedural Safeguards for Administrative Review
Case-Laws
GST
HC upheld the blocking of Input Tax Credit (ITC) under Rule 86A(1)(a) of Bihar GST Rules, 2017, finding sufficient material justifying the interim measure. The court confirmed the administrative order's validity while preserving the taxpayer's procedural remedy to challenge the ITC blockage. The respondent was directed to expeditiously consider and pass a reasoned order if the petitioner submits a request, ensuring principles of natural justice are maintained during the administrative process. Application disposed of with procedural guidance for potential future challenges.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Goods Seized After Supplier Proves Non-Existent, GST Proceedings Upheld Under Section 130 with Full Legal Validity
Case-Laws
GST
HC dismissed the petition challenging GST proceedings involving goods transportation. The court found that the supplier (M/s. Sunrise Enterprise) was a non-existent entity, and the petitioner obtained goods with a bill from an invalid supplier. Based on physical verification confirming the supplier's non-existence, the court upheld the confiscation of goods under Section 130 of the GST Act. Neither the goods supplier nor the truck owner attempted to secure release, leading to the petition's rejection and maintaining the original GST authority's order.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Tax Refund Challenge Rejected: Petitioner Must First Exhaust Statutory Appeals Under Section 107 of CGST Act
Case-Laws
GST
HC dismissed the writ petition challenging tax refund rejection, holding that the petitioner must first exhaust statutory appellate remedies under Section 107 of CGST Act before seeking judicial intervention. The court found the challenge premature, as the underlying adjudication order comprehensively addressed factual issues. The petitioner was directed to pursue the prescribed administrative appeal mechanism, thereby maintaining procedural propriety and preventing premature judicial interference in tax dispute resolution.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Syndicate Operator Denied Bail in Rs.56.78 Crore GST Evasion Case Involving Online Gaming Platforms
Case-Laws
GST
DSC denied bail in GST evasion case involving online money gaming platforms. The accused, identified as a key operator in a syndicate, allegedly evaded approximately Rs.56.78 Crore in GST through clandestine online services. Court emphasized economic offences are gravest societal crimes, noting critical investigation stage and potential risk of accused misusing liberty if released. Substantial incriminating evidence, including third-party payment app usage and unissued invoices, substantiated Department's allegations. Given offense's significant economic impact and ongoing investigation, bail application was conclusively rejected.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Leasehold Rights Transfer for Lump-Sum Payment Exempted from GST Under Section 7(1)(a) of CGST Act
Case-Laws
GST
HC held that assignment of leasehold rights of an industrial plot by a lessee to a third party for a lump-sum consideration does not constitute a supply under GST regulations. The court determined that such a transaction involving transfer of immovable property benefits falls outside the scope of Section 7(1)(a) of CGST Act and is not subject to CGST levy under Section 9. The court consequently invalidated the Show Cause Notice issued to the petitioner, effectively ruling in favor of the petitioner and exempting the transaction from GST implications.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Tax Credit Fraud Syndicate Exposed: Systematic Fake ITC Scheme Unravels with Overwhelming Forensic Evidence of Rs. 15 Crore Fraud
Case-Laws
GST
DSC dismisses anticipatory bail application involving systematic tax credit fraud. Investigation revealed a complex nexus of fictitious firms (M/s Khwaish Enterprise, M/s Sunrise Enterprises, M/s AC Goel Tradelinks) systematically generating fake Input Tax Credit (ITC) without actual goods supply. Forensic analysis of GSTR-2A records demonstrated over 90% fraudulent transactions, with cumulative fake ITC estimated at approximately Rs. 15 crores. Key accused, who failed to cooperate with investigation despite multiple summons, was determined to be a critical syndicate member. Court found substantial evidence of deliberate tax evasion and economic fraud, consequently rejecting anticipatory bail application.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Corporate Debt Resolution Shields Restructured Company from Post-Approval Tax Demands Under Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code
Case-Laws
GST
HC ruled that additional tax demands against the corporate debtor (CD) after NCLT's Resolution Plan approval are invalid. The court held that post-resolution plan claims by creditors would impede the implementation of the approved restructuring process. Specifically, assessment orders and demand notices for tax years 2012-13, 2013-14, and 2017-2018 were quashed. The fundamental legal principle affirmed is that once an NCLT-approved Resolution Plan is in place, subsequent creditor claims are precluded to ensure a clean slate for corporate revival. The petition was consequently allowed, protecting the integrity of the insolvency resolution mechanism under the IBC.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Legal Service via Common Portal Under GST Act Section 169(1)(d) Deemed Valid, Ex Parte Orders Set Aside with Partial Tax Deposit Requirement
Case-Laws
GST
HC held that service of notices via common portal under Section 169(1)(d) of GST Act constitutes sufficient legal service, despite potential ineffectiveness. While respondents adopted an alternative service mode, they failed to ensure effective communication. The ex parte assessment orders were set aside, with fault attributed to both parties. The matter was remanded to the Assessing Officer, with petitioner directed to deposit 10% of disputed tax within four weeks, effectively providing an opportunity for reassessment while ensuring partial tax compliance.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Tax Credit Saved: Technical Error Can't Block Legitimate Claim When Substantive Rights Are Clear and Verifiable
Case-Laws
GST
CESTAT allowed appellant's appeal, holding that transitional service tax credit of Rs. 6,15,409/- is admissible despite procedural error in form TRAN-1. The tribunal determined that technical glitch in entering data at incorrect serial number does not vitiate substantive rights. Revenue directed to treat data entered at Sr. No. 5 as equivalent to entry at Sr. No. 11, recognizing that procedural infirmities cannot defeat legitimate tax credit entitlement under Section 142(11)(c) and Rule 118 of CGST Rules, 2017. The core principle affirmed is that substantial rights supersede minor procedural non-compliance in tax credit transition.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST Rate Dispute: Works Contract Services Remain at 18% Based on Tender Submission Date and Prevailing Tax Conditions
Case-Laws
GST
HC dismissed the petition regarding GST rate applicability. The court held that the GST rate for works contract services remained 18% at the time of tender submission, as per SRO-GST-11 dated 8th July, 2017. The subsequent notification reducing the rate to 12% on 21st September 2017 would apply prospectively. Special Condition 49 stipulates that tender rates are inclusive of taxes prevailing on the last date of tender receipt. The court found no grounds to apply the reduced GST rate retrospectively, emphasizing that the original 18% rate was applicable when the tender was submitted. The petition lacks merit and was consequently dismissed.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Electronic Service via Common Portal Legally Valid Under GST Act, Section 169(1)(d) Enables Direct Digital Notification Without Additional Requirements
Case-Laws
GST
HC held that service of notice/order via common portal is valid under GST Act. Section 169(1)(d) independently provides for electronic service through common portal, without requiring additional notification under Section 146. The statutory provision explicitly enables serving decisions, orders, summons, and notices electronically. The petitioner's contention challenging portal-based service was rejected. The court set aside impugned orders, directing petitioner to deposit 25% of disputed taxes within four weeks. The judgment affirms the legal validity of electronic service mechanisms in GST proceedings.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Supplier Status Challenge: GST E-Way Bill Penalty Reduced from Rs.7,36,490 to Rs.25,000 Under Section 2(105)
Case-Laws
GST
HC ruled that the petitioner, not being a 'supplier' under GST Act Section 2(105), was improperly penalized Rs.7,36,490/- for failing to generate Part-B of E-Way Bill during goods transportation for job work. The court found the penalty disproportionate, considering the petitioner had generated Part-A of E-Way Bill and provided a valid Delivery Challan. The impugned order was modified, reducing the penalty to Rs.25,000/- and directing respondents to refund the excess amount through Electronic Cash or Credit Ledger, thereby partly allowing the petition and rectifying the unjustified punitive action.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

IGST Refund Dispute Remanded: Tax Authority Must Provide Hearing and Reconsider Order Under Rule 96B
Case-Laws
GST
HC remanded the matter concerning IGST refund dispute, setting aside the Deputy Commissioner's order dated 30.08.2024. The court directed the petitioner to file response to the show cause notice by 02.05.2025, mandating the tax authority to provide personal hearing and issue a fresh order in compliance with legal principles. While rejecting jurisdictional challenges, the court set aside the demand order under Rule 96B due to non-retrospective application and insufficient administrative consideration, effectively providing the petitioner an opportunity to present legal arguments before the tax authority.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =