PWD Wins Partial Relief: GST Refund, Service Tax Payment Directed with Penalty Exemption Under Multiple Statutory Provisions

PWD Wins Partial Relief: GST Refund, Service Tax Payment Directed with Penalty Exemption Under Multiple Statutory ProvisionsCase-LawsGSTHC dismissed the writ petition while directing PWD authorities to refund Rs. 65.28 lakhs of GST to appellant’s cash/cre

PWD Wins Partial Relief: GST Refund, Service Tax Payment Directed with Penalty Exemption Under Multiple Statutory Provisions
Case-Laws
GST
HC dismissed the writ petition while directing PWD authorities to refund Rs. 65.28 lakhs of GST to appellant's cash/credit ledger and pay Rs. 84,84,035/- towards service tax within a stipulated timeframe. The appellant must remit the service tax amount to authorities within three days of receipt. The court set aside penalties imposed under Sections 78 of Finance Act, Section 174 of CGST Act, and Sections 77(1)(a) and 77(2) of Finance Act, finding no justification for penalty imposition. The order upheld the principle of exhausting statutory appellate remedies and recognized administrative complexities in the transaction, ultimately allowing the appeal with specific monetary and procedural directions.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Taxpayers Can Rectify Technical Errors in GST TRAN-1, Ensuring Legitimate Input Tax Credit Entitlements Without Penalty

Taxpayers Can Rectify Technical Errors in GST TRAN-1, Ensuring Legitimate Input Tax Credit Entitlements Without PenaltyCase-LawsGSTHC held that a registered assessee who committed a technical error in filing GST TRAN-1 cannot be denied transitional tax cr

Taxpayers Can Rectify Technical Errors in GST TRAN-1, Ensuring Legitimate Input Tax Credit Entitlements Without Penalty
Case-Laws
GST
HC held that a registered assessee who committed a technical error in filing GST TRAN-1 cannot be denied transitional tax credit. The court emphasized that procedural technicalities should not deprive an eligible taxpayer of legitimate tax benefits. Relying on SC precedents, the court directed the tax authorities to facilitate revision of the GST TRAN-1 form, recognizing the indefeasible nature of input tax credits. The writ appeal was dismissed, upholding the Single Judge's order that allows the taxpayer to rectify the inadvertent error in the transitional credit form.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Bengal’s GST collection in FY 2024-25 higher than national-level: Mamata

Bengal’s GST collection in FY 2024-25 higher than national-level: MamataGSTDated:- 6-4-2025PTIKolkata, Apr 6 (PTI) West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee on Sunday said the state is steadily progressing in its own resource mobilisation efforts and has

Bengal's GST collection in FY 2024-25 higher than national-level: Mamata
GST
Dated:- 6-4-2025
PTI
Kolkata, Apr 6 (PTI) West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee on Sunday said the state is steadily progressing in its own resource mobilisation efforts and has achieved 11.43 per cent growth in GST collection in 2024-25 financial year, which is two per cent more than the national level.
Banerjee said West Bengal in the 2024-25 financial year recorded a GST collection of Rs 4,808 crore more than the preceding year.
“Glad to share that West Bengal is steadily progressing in its own resource mobilisation efforts, which is evident from the fiscal results compiled at the end of the FY 2024-25. In GST in 24-25, we have collected Rs 4,

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Taxpayers Can Leverage Section 128A Benefits for Tax Payments Made Before 1st November 2024 with Specific Compliance

Taxpayers Can Leverage Section 128A Benefits for Tax Payments Made Before 1st November 2024 with Specific ComplianceCircularsGST – StatesThe circular addresses two key issues regarding Section 128A of the CGST Act, 2017. First, taxpayers who made tax paym

Taxpayers Can Leverage Section 128A Benefits for Tax Payments Made Before 1st November 2024 with Specific Compliance
Circulars
GST – States
The circular addresses two key issues regarding Section 128A of the CGST Act, 2017. First, taxpayers who made tax payments through GSTR-3B before 1st November 2024 remain eligible for benefits under Section 128A, subject to proper officer verification. Second, for notices/orders spanning periods partially covered and outside Section 128A, taxpayers can file FORM SPL-01 or SPL-02 after paying tax liability for the covered period (FY 2017-18 to 2019-20). The appellate authority will then pass appropriate orders for periods outside the specified timeframe, allowing partial appeal withdrawal while maintaining the intent to avail Section 128A benefits.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Accused Granted Bail in GST Evasion Case After Careful Review of Investigation Status and Potential Flight Risk

Accused Granted Bail in GST Evasion Case After Careful Review of Investigation Status and Potential Flight RiskCase-LawsGSTHC granted regular bail to the accused in GST evasion case, finding no immediate risk of witness tampering or flight. Despite docume

Accused Granted Bail in GST Evasion Case After Careful Review of Investigation Status and Potential Flight Risk
Case-Laws
GST
HC granted regular bail to the accused in GST evasion case, finding no immediate risk of witness tampering or flight. Despite documentary evidence of alleged offenses and ongoing investigation, the court noted the trial has not commenced, co-accused has been released, and maximum punishment is five years. Bail was sanctioned subject to furnishing bail bonds and surety bonds to the trial court's satisfaction, with standard conditional compliance requirements.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Legal Challenge Upheld: Statutory Non-Compliance Invalidates Order When Demand Exceeds Show-Cause Notice Amount Under Section 75(7)

Legal Challenge Upheld: Statutory Non-Compliance Invalidates Order When Demand Exceeds Show-Cause Notice Amount Under Section 75(7)Case-LawsGSTHC found a violation of Section 75(7) where the demand amount (Rs. 59,27,500/-) exceeded the show-cause notice a

Legal Challenge Upheld: Statutory Non-Compliance Invalidates Order When Demand Exceeds Show-Cause Notice Amount Under Section 75(7)
Case-Laws
GST
HC found a violation of Section 75(7) where the demand amount (Rs. 59,27,500/-) exceeded the show-cause notice amount (Rs. 28,15,200/-). Despite procedural irregularities in hearing scheduling, the court primarily focused on the statutory non-compliance. The impugned order was set aside, and the matter was remanded to the respondent to provide proper opportunity of hearing and issue a fresh order in accordance with legal provisions, thereby allowing the petition and ensuring procedural fairness.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Pharmaceutical Exporter Wins IGST Refund Claim, Court Orders Immediate Manual Processing Despite Technical Challenges

Pharmaceutical Exporter Wins IGST Refund Claim, Court Orders Immediate Manual Processing Despite Technical ChallengesCase-LawsGSTHC upheld Petitioner’s entitlement to IGST refund for pharmaceutical product exports from July 2017 to April 2018. Despite tec

Pharmaceutical Exporter Wins IGST Refund Claim, Court Orders Immediate Manual Processing Despite Technical Challenges
Case-Laws
GST
HC upheld Petitioner's entitlement to IGST refund for pharmaceutical product exports from July 2017 to April 2018. Despite technical processing challenges acknowledged by Respondents, the court mandated manual refund processing within two weeks, consistent with the earlier Refund Sanctioning Order. The technical impediment was deemed insufficient to obstruct the Petitioner's legitimate refund claim. Petition was consequently disposed of, directing immediate compliance by Respondents.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Legal Challenge to CGST Act Section 16(2)(c) Succeeds: Procedural Delay Condoned, Appeal Merits to Be Evaluated Fairly

Legal Challenge to CGST Act Section 16(2)(c) Succeeds: Procedural Delay Condoned, Appeal Merits to Be Evaluated FairlyCase-LawsGSTHC adjudicated constitutional challenge to Section 16(2)(c) of CGST Act, determining procedural validity regarding time limit

Legal Challenge to CGST Act Section 16(2)(c) Succeeds: Procedural Delay Condoned, Appeal Merits to Be Evaluated Fairly
Case-Laws
GST
HC adjudicated constitutional challenge to Section 16(2)(c) of CGST Act, determining procedural validity regarding time limitation. The court directed the Appellate Authority to consider the petitioner's time spent before the court as bona fide and condone delay in appeal filing. The impugned Order-in-Appeal was quashed and set aside, with the matter remanded to the Appellate Authority for merit-based evaluation. The court explicitly instructed that the appeal shall not be rejected solely on grounds of procedural delay, effectively providing equitable relief to the petitioner and ensuring substantive hearing of the underlying dispute.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Tax Order Quashed: Procedural Defects Invalidate Summary Dismissal of Petitioner’s Challenge Under Section 73(9)

Tax Order Quashed: Procedural Defects Invalidate Summary Dismissal of Petitioner’s Challenge Under Section 73(9)Case-LawsGSTHC allowed the petition challenging a tax order under Section 73(9) of CGST Act, 2017. The court found the original order non-speak

Tax Order Quashed: Procedural Defects Invalidate Summary Dismissal of Petitioner's Challenge Under Section 73(9)
Case-Laws
GST
HC allowed the petition challenging a tax order under Section 73(9) of CGST Act, 2017. The court found the original order non-speaking and procedurally defective, as the tax officer summarily dismissed the petitioner's reply without substantive reasoning. The order was set aside, directing the tax authority to reconsider the matter and provide a proper hearing to the petitioner, ensuring principles of natural justice are upheld. The decision emphasizes the requirement for reasoned, transparent administrative actions in tax proceedings.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Legal Relief Granted: GST Registration Restored After Director’s Death and Incorrect Professional Guidance

Legal Relief Granted: GST Registration Restored After Director’s Death and Incorrect Professional GuidanceCase-LawsGSTHC held that petitioner’s GST registration cancellation was amenable to relief based on genuine circumstances of director’s demise and co

Legal Relief Granted: GST Registration Restored After Director's Death and Incorrect Professional Guidance
Case-Laws
GST
HC held that petitioner's GST registration cancellation was amenable to relief based on genuine circumstances of director's demise and consultant's incorrect advice. The court directed petitioner to file all pending GST returns within 4 weeks of registration restoration, accompanied by complete tax dues, applicable interest, and belated filing fees. The judicial intervention effectively provided an opportunity for procedural compliance and rectification of administrative non-compliance, recognizing the extenuating circumstances that led to the initial default.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

HC grants interim stay on Rs 2,500 crore GST demand against Hindustan Coco-Cola Beverages

HC grants interim stay on Rs 2,500 crore GST demand against Hindustan Coco-Cola BeveragesGSTDated:- 4-4-2025PTIMumbai, Apr 4 (PTI) The Bombay High Court has granted an interim stay on a GST demand of approximately Rs 2,500 crore against Hindustan Coca-Col

HC grants interim stay on Rs 2,500 crore GST demand against Hindustan Coco-Cola Beverages
GST
Dated:- 4-4-2025
PTI
Mumbai, Apr 4 (PTI) The Bombay High Court has granted an interim stay on a GST demand of approximately Rs 2,500 crore against Hindustan Coca-Cola Beverages Private Limited noting the revenue department's interpretation of the provisions appeared “prima facie incorrect”.
The show cause notice was issued in January based on findings that the company undervalued goods over seven assessment years by offering retrospective discounts to distributors.
As per the authorities, the discounts were structured in a way that reduced the taxable value of the supplies.
Distributors first extended discounts to retailers, and Coca

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Advisory on Case Sensitivity in IRN Generation

Advisory on Case Sensitivity in IRN GenerationGSTDated:- 4-4-2025Dear 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 gen

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

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 trea

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Input Tax Credit Denied for Concrete Tower Construction Supporting Manufacturing Lines Under Section 17(5)(d) of CGST Act

Input Tax Credit Denied for Concrete Tower Construction Supporting Manufacturing Lines Under Section 17(5)(d) of CGST ActCase-LawsGSTThe AAR ruled that the applicant cannot avail Input Tax Credit (ITC) on inputs and services used for constructing a concre

Input Tax Credit Denied for Concrete Tower Construction Supporting Manufacturing Lines Under Section 17(5)(d) of CGST Act
Case-Laws
GST
The AAR ruled that the applicant cannot avail Input Tax Credit (ITC) on inputs and services used for constructing a concrete tower to support VCV lines for manufacturing EHV cables. Applying the Supreme Court's functionality test from Safari Retreats, the AAR determined that while a building may qualify as “plant” under Section 17(5)(d) of CGST Act, ITC is unavailable when construction is for the recipient's own use. The AAR found the applicant failed to prove the construction was not on their own account, breaking the ITC chain. The authority dismissed the applicant's reliance on various judgments as irrelevant, noting they primarily pertained to Income Tax matters rather than GST provisions.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Input Tax Credit Available on Employer’s Share of Mandatory Canteen Services Under Factories Act

Input Tax Credit Available on Employer’s Share of Mandatory Canteen Services Under Factories ActCase-LawsGSTThe AAR ruled that Input Tax Credit (ITC) is available to the applicant for GST charged on food and beverages provided through mandatory canteen fa

Input Tax Credit Available on Employer's Share of Mandatory Canteen Services Under Factories Act
Case-Laws
GST
The AAR ruled that Input Tax Credit (ITC) is available to the applicant for GST charged on food and beverages provided through mandatory canteen facilities under the Factories Act, 1948, read with Gujarat Factories Rules, 1963. This eligibility applies specifically to canteen services for factory employees where such provision is obligatory under law. However, the ITC is limited strictly to the portion of the cost borne by the applicant company, excluding any contribution made by employees. This ruling creates a specific exception to the general restriction on ITC for food and beverages by recognizing the statutory obligation to provide canteen facilities.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Goods Delivered Under Fraudulent Orders Still Constitute “Supply” Under Section 7 of CGST Act Despite Non-Payment

Goods Delivered Under Fraudulent Orders Still Constitute “Supply” Under Section 7 of CGST Act Despite Non-PaymentCase-LawsGSTThe AAR ruled that goods supplied by the applicant, despite being a victim of fraud without receiving consideration, still constit

Goods Delivered Under Fraudulent Orders Still Constitute “Supply” Under Section 7 of CGST Act Despite Non-Payment
Case-Laws
GST
The AAR ruled that goods supplied by the applicant, despite being a victim of fraud without receiving consideration, still constituted a “supply” under GST law. The authority determined that while fraud may vitiate a contract, it does not negate the statutory definition of “supply” under section 7 of the CGST Act. The facts established that goods were physically removed and received at the destination, as confirmed by the FIR. The AAR concluded that the transaction qualified as supply of goods under section 20 of the IGST Act read with sections 12 and 7 of the CGST Act, regardless of the fraudulent nature of the order.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Investment Firm Cannot Claim Input Tax Credit on Mutual Fund Transactions Under Section 17(2)

Investment Firm Cannot Claim Input Tax Credit on Mutual Fund Transactions Under Section 17(2)Case-LawsGSTThe AAR ruled that the applicant is not eligible to avail Input Tax Credit (ITC) on tax paid for inputs and input services related to mutual fund subs

Investment Firm Cannot Claim Input Tax Credit on Mutual Fund Transactions Under Section 17(2)
Case-Laws
GST
The AAR ruled that the applicant is not eligible to avail Input Tax Credit (ITC) on tax paid for inputs and input services related to mutual fund subscription and redemption activities. The Authority rejected the applicant's contention that redemption of mutual funds differs from sale of securities, clarifying that redemption constitutes a sale transaction regardless of nomenclature, as it involves cessation of ownership by the unit holder. Consequently, the applicant must reverse ITC on common inputs and input services used for mutual fund subscription and redemption activities in accordance with Section 17(2). The applicant's argument regarding lack of statutory machinery provisions to calculate exempt supply value was also dismissed.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Rice Husk Board with PVC Resin Cannot Be Classified Under Chapter 44 of GST Tariff

Rice Husk Board with PVC Resin Cannot Be Classified Under Chapter 44 of GST TariffCase-LawsGSTThe AAR dismissed an application seeking classification of rice husk board (containing rice husk powder, calcium carbonate, recycled waste, processing aids, and

Rice Husk Board with PVC Resin Cannot Be Classified Under Chapter 44 of GST Tariff
Case-Laws
GST
The AAR dismissed an application seeking classification of rice husk board (containing rice husk powder, calcium carbonate, recycled waste, processing aids, and PVC resin as a bonding agent) under Chapter 44 of the GST tariff. The authority found the application unmaintainable for several reasons: the submission appeared to be an exact reproduction of a previous ruling (M/s. Papaka Herbs & Spices Private Ltd.), the submitted test report from a NABL-accredited laboratory contained parameters not covered under NABL accreditation, the report lacked reference to BIS standards, and the applicant failed to provide supporting documentation such as brochures, purchase invoices for inputs, or sales invoices.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST Officer Appointed Under Karnataka GST Act Qualifies as Proper Officer Under IGST Act Through Cross-Empowerment Provisions

GST Officer Appointed Under Karnataka GST Act Qualifies as Proper Officer Under IGST Act Through Cross-Empowerment ProvisionsCase-LawsGSTThe HC held that an officer appointed under Section 6 of the Karnataka GST Act qualifies as a proper officer under Sec

GST Officer Appointed Under Karnataka GST Act Qualifies as Proper Officer Under IGST Act Through Cross-Empowerment Provisions
Case-Laws
GST
The HC held that an officer appointed under Section 6 of the Karnataka GST Act qualifies as a proper officer under Section 4 of the IGST Act through cross-empowerment provisions. The court determined that challenges to confiscation orders passed under Section 130 must proceed through statutory appeal mechanisms under Section 107 of KGST rather than writ petitions, following precedents from SC decisions in Falcon Enterprises and Commercial Steel Ltd. The petition was deemed not entertainable due to the existence of alternative statutory remedy. The court disposed of the petition while granting the petitioner 4 weeks to file an appeal under Section 107 KGST read with Section 20 IGST.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Gujarat Maritime Board Dredging Services Not Eligible for Exemption Under N/N 9/2017-IT (Rate) as Amended

Gujarat Maritime Board Dredging Services Not Eligible for Exemption Under N/N 9/2017-IT (Rate) as AmendedCase-LawsGSTThe applicant sought ruling on eligibility for exemption under serial No. 3A of N/N. 9/2017-IT (Rate) as amended by N/N. 2/2018-IT (Rate)

Gujarat Maritime Board Dredging Services Not Eligible for Exemption Under N/N 9/2017-IT (Rate) as Amended
Case-Laws
GST
The applicant sought ruling on eligibility for exemption under serial No. 3A of N/N. 9/2017-IT (Rate) as amended by N/N. 2/2018-IT (Rate) regarding dredging services supplied to Gujarat Maritime Board. The AAR determined that while Gujarat Maritime Board is a body corporate, the term “government entity” has been omitted from the exemption notification. The AAR ruled that the applicant is not eligible for the benefit claimed under the exemption notification. The Authority also noted that in accordance with Section 103 of the CGST Act, 2017, this advance ruling is binding only on the applicant who sought it.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Input Tax Credit Not Available for Share Buyback Expenditure Under GST as Securities Fall Outside Supply Definition

Input Tax Credit Not Available for Share Buyback Expenditure Under GST as Securities Fall Outside Supply DefinitionCase-LawsGSTThe AAR ruled that a listed entity is not eligible to avail Input Tax Credit (ITC) on expenditure incurred for buyback of its sh

Input Tax Credit Not Available for Share Buyback Expenditure Under GST as Securities Fall Outside Supply Definition
Case-Laws
GST
The AAR ruled that a listed entity is not eligible to avail Input Tax Credit (ITC) on expenditure incurred for buyback of its shares. The authority determined that buyback of shares is neither a supply of goods nor services, as “securities” are explicitly excluded from both definitions under CGST Act. Since section 16(1) permits ITC only on supply of goods or services used in course of business, the primary condition for ITC availment is not satisfied. The applicant's argument that such expenditure furthers business activity becomes irrelevant once the threshold requirement fails. The AAR concluded that the applicant must reverse ITC on common inputs and input services related to share buyback expenditure.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Businesses Can Apply Margin Scheme for Second-Hand Goods While Maintaining Regular GST Procedures for Other Operations Under Rule 32(5)

Businesses Can Apply Margin Scheme for Second-Hand Goods While Maintaining Regular GST Procedures for Other Operations Under Rule 32(5)Case-LawsGSTAAR ruled that businesses can utilize Rule 32(5) valuation (margin scheme) for second-hand goods while maint

Businesses Can Apply Margin Scheme for Second-Hand Goods While Maintaining Regular GST Procedures for Other Operations Under Rule 32(5)
Case-Laws
GST
AAR ruled that businesses can utilize Rule 32(5) valuation (margin scheme) for second-hand goods while maintaining regular valuation for existing operations. Taxpayers may selectively apply this scheme to purchases from unregistered dealers while using standard GST procedures for registered dealer purchases. Under the margin scheme, the taxable value is the difference between selling price and purchase price, excluding repair/improvement costs. When using this scheme, input tax credit cannot be claimed on either purchase price or repair costs. Purchases of second-hand goods from unregistered dealers are exempt from reverse charge mechanism for intra-state supplies under Notification No. 10/2017-CT(R).
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Condonation of Delay in GST Returns Filing Beyond 30-Day Period Under Section 62(2) Granted While Preserving Late Fees

Condonation of Delay in GST Returns Filing Beyond 30-Day Period Under Section 62(2) Granted While Preserving Late FeesCase-LawsGSTHC condoned the delay in filing GST returns beyond the 30-day period specified in Section 62(2) of the GST Act, 2017, followi

Condonation of Delay in GST Returns Filing Beyond 30-Day Period Under Section 62(2) Granted While Preserving Late Fees
Case-Laws
GST
HC condoned the delay in filing GST returns beyond the 30-day period specified in Section 62(2) of the GST Act, 2017, following the precedent established in Comfort Shoe Components case. While granting relief, the Court preserved the respondent's authority to impose applicable late fees for the delayed period. The petitioner was directed to file a formal application for condonation of delay before the respondent within 15 days from receipt of the order. The petition was accordingly disposed of, balancing taxpayer relief with regulatory compliance by maintaining the statutory consequence of late filing while removing the procedural bar.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Free Scraping Tool with Apsara Oil Pastels Constitutes Mixed Supply Under Section 2(74), Taxable at 18% GST (74)

Free Scraping Tool with Apsara Oil Pastels Constitutes Mixed Supply Under Section 2(74), Taxable at 18% GST (74)Case-LawsGSTThe AAR determined that the inclusion of a free scraping tool with Apsara Oil Pastels constitutes a “mixed supply” under section 2(

Free Scraping Tool with Apsara Oil Pastels Constitutes Mixed Supply Under Section 2(74), Taxable at 18% GST (74)
Case-Laws
GST
The AAR determined that the inclusion of a free scraping tool with Apsara Oil Pastels constitutes a “mixed supply” under section 2(74) of the CGST Act, 2017, rather than a composite supply. The authority rejected the applicant's contention that the scraping tool was merely an accessory, finding that the two products were not integral to each other's function. Since the products were supplied together for a single price, section 8(b) of the CGST Act applies, requiring taxation at the higher applicable rate between the two items. Consequently, the entire “Apsara Oil Pastels with Free Scraping Tool” package was classified under HSN 3926, attracting GST at 18% in accordance with entry no. 111 of Schedule-III.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST Demand Against Deceased Invalid Without Show Cause Notice to Legal Representative Under Section 93

GST Demand Against Deceased Invalid Without Show Cause Notice to Legal Representative Under Section 93Case-LawsGSTThe HC ruled that a GST demand against a deceased individual without issuing a show cause notice to their legal representative is invalid. Wh

GST Demand Against Deceased Invalid Without Show Cause Notice to Legal Representative Under Section 93
Case-Laws
GST
The HC ruled that a GST demand against a deceased individual without issuing a show cause notice to their legal representative is invalid. While Section 93 of the GST Act addresses the liability of legal representatives to pay tax, interest, or penalties after a proprietor's death, it does not authorize determinations against deceased persons. The court held that issuing notice to and seeking response from the legal representative is a prerequisite before making any determination. Consequently, the determination made against the deceased without proper notice to the legal representative was unsustainable and the petition was allowed.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

No GST Payable on Gas Lost During Transit, But Input Tax Credit Must Be Reversed Under Section 16(1)

No GST Payable on Gas Lost During Transit, But Input Tax Credit Must Be Reversed Under Section 16(1)Case-LawsGSTThe AAR ruled that no GST is payable on goods (gas) lost during transit as no supply occurred, since the loss happened before delivery to the c

No GST Payable on Gas Lost During Transit, But Input Tax Credit Must Be Reversed Under Section 16(1)
Case-Laws
GST
The AAR ruled that no GST is payable on goods (gas) lost during transit as no supply occurred, since the loss happened before delivery to the customer and prior to the place and time of supply being established. However, the applicant must reverse Input Tax Credit (ITC) on inputs used in manufacturing the goods subsequently lost in transit. The authority determined that such inputs fail the “proper end use” condition under Section 16(1) of CGST Act, as they were not ultimately used in furtherance of business through a taxable outward supply. The ITC reversal is required under Section 17(5)(h) read with Section 16, as the goods were lost/destroyed during transit.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =