Author: admin_gst

Refund claim rejected for missing documents, petitioner seeks chance to submit evidence; rejection set aside and remanded for reconsideration.
Case-Laws
GST
Rejection of a refund claim was challenged on the ground that necessary supporting documents had not been furnished earlier and a further opportunity was sought to produce additional documents. Applying a justice-oriented approach and principles of fair opportunity, the impugned orders rejecting the refund were set aside and the mat

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Deferred input tax credit claimed beyond s.16(4) limits: s.107 rectification reconsidered after s.148 notification; remanded
Case-Laws
GST
Where rectification of an appellate order under s.107 of the WBGST Act, 2017 was refused in a dispute concerning deferred availment of ITC alleged to be barred by s.16(4), the governing Notification dated 08.10.2024 issued under s.148 was held to clarify both entitlement and procedure for rectification where ITC was treated as wrongly availed solely

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Parallel GST show-cause proceedings by State after Central notice u/s 6(2)(b) barred; State order quashed.
Case-Laws
GST
State GST authorities were held to lack jurisdiction to initiate or continue proceedings where Central GST authorities had already initiated proceedings against the taxpayer by issuing a show-cause notice, since dual/parallel proceedings are barred under Section 6(2)(b) of the CGST Act, 2017. Applying the binding precedent on identical facts, the impugned order-in-ori

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Pending tax refund application seeking interest and penalty: authority ordered to decide claim and issue orders within four months
Case-Laws
GST
The dominant issue was whether the tax authority should be directed to act on a pending refund application and consider interest and penalty. The court held that the authority must decide the refund application in accordance with law, specifically taking into account the claim for refund along with applicable interest, and bearing in mind bindi

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Alleged bogus firms and fake e-way bills under CGST ss. 67, 132, with seized digital evidence; anticipatory bail granted
Case-Laws
GST
Anticipatory bail was sought in a prosecution alleging creation of bogus firms and facilitation of fake e-way bills under ss. 67 and 132 of the CGST/SGST Act. The court held that the allegations were chiefly founded on documentary and digital material already seized during the search, with no pending recovery shown, reducing the necessity of custodial in

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST refund claim after deficiency memo: limitation u/s54(3) runs from first filing; time-bar rejection quashed, remanded.
Case-Laws
GST
Refund was rejected as time-barred under s.54(3) CGST Act by treating a later revised application (filed after a deficiency memo) as the relevant date for limitation. The Court held that limitation must be computed from the date of the initial refund application, and a subsequent revised filing pursuant to a deficiency memo cannot shift the limitation s

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Bank-account attachment for another company's tax dues challenged; recovery quashed as no garnishee liability and veil-piercing unjustified.
Case-Laws
GST
Attachment and recovery from a company's bank account was challenged on the ground that the demand and adjudication were issued against a distinct juristic entity. The court held that where the show-cause notice and adjudication order were addressed to another company, the petitioner could not be fastened with that entity's dues absen

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Clinical trial and R&D services for US recipient treated as export; Notification 04/2019-IGST applied retrospectively, GST demands set aside.
Case-Laws
GST
Clinical trial and related R&D services supplied to a foreign recipient raised the issue whether the place of supply was outside India, making the supply an export and not liable to GST, and whether Notification No. 04/2019-IGST dated 30.09.2019 applied retrospectively to the period April 2018-March 2019. The notification clarified t

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Service tax show-cause notice invoking extended limitation u/s 73(1) without suppression details quashed as invalid
Case-Laws
GST
Invocation of the extended limitation period under Section 73(1) of the Finance Act, 1994 was held unsustainable because the show-cause notice did not plead or disclose the requisite jurisdictional ingredients (such as suppression or wilful misstatement) and lacked supporting material. Limitation was treated as a jurisdictional fact, requiring satisfaction of

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Voluntary GST short-payment disclosure and composite-supply classification dispute: s.74 demand and s.39(9) ITC denial quashed
Case-Laws
GST
Where the taxpayer had voluntarily intimated short payment and its willingness to discharge tax much before any enforcement action, the essential preconditions of fraud, wilful misstatement, or suppression were not made out, rendering invocation of s.74 GST impermissible; consequently, denial of ITC by applying s.39(9) could not be sustained, and t

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Marketing and technical support services to foreign client under master service agreement: not “intermediary” under IGST s2(13); refund allowed
Case-Laws
GST
The dominant issue was whether the marketing support and technical support services supplied to a foreign recipient under a master service agreement constituted “intermediary services” under section 2(13) of the IGST Act, thereby disentitling the supplier from treating the supply as export and claiming refund of accumulated input t

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Gross and Net GST revenue collections for the month of Dec, 2025
GST
Dated:- 3-1-2026

The gross and net GST revenue collections for the month of Dec, 2025.
Thanks,
Team GSTN
=============
Document 1Overwriting cache for 0 113
GST Gross and Net Collections as on 31/12/2025 (Amount in crores)
MonthlyYearly
GST CollectionsDec-24Dec-25% GrowthDec-24Dec-25% Growth
ABCD= C/B-1EFG = F/E-1
A.1. Domestic
CGST32,83634,2893,04,3503,27,496
SGST40,49941,3683,77,9114,04,315
IGST47,78346,9174,49,8394,76,852
Gross Domestic Revenue1,21,1181,22,5741.2%11,32,10012,08,6636.8%
A.2. Imports
IGST43,43851,9773,87,6974,41,376
Gross Import Revenue43,43851,97719.7%3,87,6974,41,37613.8%
A.3. Gross GST Revenue(A.1+A.2)
CGST32,83634,2893,04,3503,27,496
SGST40,49941,3683,77,9114,04,315
IGST91,22198,8948,37,5369,18,227
Total Gross GST Revenue1,64,5561,74,5506.1%15,19,79716,50,0398.6%
B.1. Domestic Refunds
CGST2,9064,27424,64929,376
SGST3,6535,43931,12537,460
IGST4,8138,70940,52259,044
Refund – Dome

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

(1) Compensation cess is continuing only as a transitory arrangement till entire loan and interest liability are d
(2) The above numbers are provisional and the actuals number may have slightly vary on finalisation.
Table 1: SGST & SGST portion of IGST settled to States/UTs during December, 2025
(Rs. in crore)
Pre-Settlement SGSTPost-Settlement SGST
State/UTDec-24Dec-25Growth (%)Dec-24Dec-25Growth (%)
Jammu and Kashmir221204-8%642592-8%
Himachal Pradesh201181-10%4524827%
Punjab728719-1%2,0501,966-4%
Chandigarh6662-5%1831882%
Uttarakhand439391-11%66075715%
Haryana1,8111,8361%3,1173,62916%
Delhi1,3531,298-4%2,7422,684-2%
Rajasthan1,4191,4412%3,4273,4551%
Uttar Pradesh2,5352,5380%6,3816,6715%
Bihar768717-7%2,1972,43511%
Sikkim3836-6%799216%
Arunachal Pradesh325469%1361467%
Nagaland222623%8988-1%
Manipur2120-4%73798%
Mizoram1413-5%667412%
Tripura404717%129124-4%
Meghalaya375344%1291398%
Assam5055060%1,1621,2215%
West Bengal1,8091,8472%3,5243,5591%
Jharkhand7057709%1,101916-17%
Odisha1

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

35,46921%
Delhi13,20014,46010%26,77128,0105%
Rajasthan13,43714,2226%32,08533,7965%
Uttar Pradesh25,91126,4742%63,06862,362-1%
Bihar6,6817,47912%20,93122,793
Sikkim30237925%72587120%
Arunachal Pradesh39355140%1,3241,51915%
Nagaland20829341%78989714%
Manipur271269-1%855844-1%
Mizoram202158-22%699690-1%
Tripura3914248%1,2681,228-3%
Meghalaya44450113%1,3161,305-1%
Assam4,7125,0678%11,51413,70619%
West Bengal17,83418,5424%34,26134,3790%
Jharkhand6,4817,0098%10,42810,282-1%
Odisha13,07713,6705%19,17817,822-7%
Chhattisgarh6,3886,7636%11,39910,657-7%
Madhya Pradesh10,10710,7596%26,50325,814-3%
Gujarat33,32836,0648%53,74658,6489%
Dadra and Nagar Haveli and5535815%955920-4%
Maharashtra83,40690,5509%1,26,2671,43,17113%
Karnataka33,16636,72011%61,31063,9464%
Goa1,8781,9212%3,2513,2881%
Lakshadweep76-12%823-96%
Kerala10,92711,7047%24,34125,0013%
Tamil Nadu33,99035,7635%56,98657,8061%
Puducherry4074265%1,1431,055-8%
Andaman and Nicobar Islan1641683%43054627%
Telangana15,67516,3694%32,65333,7974%
And

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

762,2920.9%12.3%7.1%
5Uttarakhand95,4831,3462,1763,5687,0901,22,7131,7722,4573,6207,8493,1184,6347,18814,9401.4%-8.0%-3.7%
6Haryana2,65,5416,3848,13028,94543,4593,46,8128,30210,54126,26445,10714,68618,67155,20888,5667.3%7.2%7.2%
7Delhi3,42,0825,5636,34412,63124,5385,28,3917,0388,11721,77736,93212,60214,46034,40861,47013.3%2.9%6.8%
8Rajasthan3,60,0924,8886,3026,86118,0505,99,4986,2287,9207,73521,88311,11614,22214,59639,9334.1%5.1%4.7%
9Uttar Pradesh9,45,0569,24212,26114,41735,92111,48,61911,01414,21313,12738,35420,25626,47427,54474,2744.0%4.1%4.0%
10Bihar2,98,0601,7962,9871,4886,2713,70,8372,4914,4921,0618,0444,2867,4792,54914,31511.5%13.3%12.5%
11Sikkim4,9451151441,4011,6606,7011832341,0301,4472983792,4313,107-2.3%9.2%2.7%
12Arunachal Pradesh8,7491521845238812,464296367807444485511331,13232.0%37.7%35.7%
13Nagaland4,499101125272526,5841331697337523429310062738.1%36.3%37.0%
14Manipur6,0915877211568,88614919250391207269715473.7%1.5%2.1%
5Mizoram3,8774566361465,43364921517210915851318-16.0

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

,15,55135,66941,36245,2411,22,27211,32,91343,22849,18852,0391,44,45478,89690,55097,2802,66,7269.7%7.1%8.3%
29Karnataka4,39,44013,82117,29827,04958,1686,46,96416,02019,42222,88558,32729,84236,72049,9341,16,49510.1%13.4%11.7%
30Goa19,4275457048232,07328,9261,0011,2178723,0891,5461,9211,6955,162-3.0%2.9%0.5%
31Lakshadweep25113712249233836101953.1%-6.1%22.3%
32Kerala1,73,0365,5236,6383,13215,2932,62,3704,0135,0662,02211,1019,53611,7045,15426,39412.4%3.3%8.4%
33Tamil Nadu5,03,23611,91314,88816,63243,4337,13,12115,77520,87517,28053,93127,68835,76333,91397,3647.7%8.5%8.1%
34Puducherry10,21211417342170715,4811832538941,3312974261,3152,03811.7%-10.0%-3.5%
35Islands Andaman and Nicobar2,8368096842603,54253722114613416810540723.5%18.1%21.5%
36Telangana2,43,5026,0227,4466,90620,3743,20,5107,0198,9227,73223,67313,04016,36914,63844,0475.7%5.8%5.7%
37Andhra Pradesh1,85,9794,3195,6066,69216,6172,54,4464,4535,6554,86214,9708,77211,26011,55431,586-0.4%3.6%1.5%
38Ladakh3,7465171101326,6511031403628015521

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Export refund rectification denied despite documents proving export proceeds realized; order set aside for fresh decision on natural justice grounds
Case-Laws
GST
Rectification relating to export refund was rejected without considering documents evidencing realization of export proceeds, thereby breaching natural justice. The record showed the documents were in fact produced with the representation, and the authority failed to address them while deciding rectification. Applying prior bi

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Detention and penalty for unloading goods at unregistered extra business site with valid invoice/e-way bill; set aside
Case-Laws
GST
Detention/penal proceedings for unloading goods at an additional place of business were challenged where the goods were accompanied by a valid tax invoice and valid e-way bill. The First Appellate Authority accepted the taxpayer's explanation that unloading occurred at an additional place subsequently registered, treating the lapse as technical with no int

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST refund claims for Jan 2019-Mar 2021 filings and Covid limitation exclusion (Notification 13/2022) treated as within time; rejection set aside
Case-Laws
GST
Rejection of a tax refund claim as time-barred was held unsustainable because the record showed the claimant had filed an initial refund application on 09.05.2023 within the statutory period for January 2019 to March 2021, and also filed a further claim on 28.02.2024, the date the authority itself treated as the outer limit, yet

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Deemed RSP-based valuation for pan masala and tobacco products under new CGST Rule 31D, effective Feb 2026
Notifications
GST
Inserts rule 31D in the CGST Rules, 2017 to prescribe a deemed valuation method for specified goods (including pan masala and specified tobacco and nicotine-inhalation products): the value of supply is the declared retail sale price (maximum price on the package, inclusive of all taxes and levies) reduced by the applicable GST computed by a prescribed back-calcula

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

RSP-based valuation for pan masala and specified tobacco/nicotine supplies added to tax notification, effective 1 February 2026
Notifications
GST
Notification No. 49/2023-Central Tax is amended to insert a new clause covering supplies of specified RSP-declared goods, namely pan masala (2106 90 20) and specified tobacco and nicotine products under headings 2401, 2402, 2403 (excluding biris), 2404 11 00 and 2404 19 00. “Retail sale price” is defined as the maximum price declared on the pa

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

IGST rate changes for tobacco goods: biris at 18%, pan masala and cigarettes at 40%, effective 1 Feb 2026
Notifications
GST
Amends Notification 09/2025-Integrated Tax (Rate) to revise the IGST rate schedules for specified tobacco-related goods by inserting biris (HS 2403 19 21, 2403 19 29) in Schedule II at 18%, and inserting pan masala (HS 2106 90 20), unmanufactured tobacco and tobacco refuse (HS 2401), cigars/cigarettes and similar products (HS 2402), other manufactured tobacco exclu

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

CBI Arrests One IRS-C&IT Officer and Two Superintendents of CGST Jhansi for Taking Bribe of Rs. 70 Lakh
GST
Dated:- 2-1-2026

The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) has busted a bribery racket in the office of Central Goods & Services Tax, (CGST) Jhansi, Uttar Pradesh during an operation launched on 30.12.2025 and has arrested a Deputy Commissioner (IRS-C&IT), Two Superintendents, an Advocate and Owner of a Private Company, in a bribery case.
The CBI registered the instant case on 30.12.2025 against the Deputy Commissioner (IRS-C&IT 2016); Two Superintendents, all posted at CGST, Jhansi; an Advocate; Owners of private companies and unknown others on the allegation of demand of undue advantage of Rs. 1.5 crore for f

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Rupee rises 6 paise to 89.92 against US dollar in early trade
GST
Dated:- 2-1-2026
PTI
Mumbai, Jan 2 (PTI) The rupee witnessed range-bound trade in the morning session on Friday, appreciating by 6 paise to 89.92 against the US dollar as thin liquidity conditions accentuated everyday demand-supply imbalances, keeping the rupee tilted toward weakness.
Forex traders said the USD/INR pair is expected to trade in a narrow range as the 90 level is being protected by the Reserve Bank of India.
Moreover, the support from positive domestic equities was offset by sustained foreign fund outflows.
At the interbank foreign exchange market, the rupee opened at 89.95 against the US dollar, then gained some ground and touched 89.92, risin

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

which gauges the greenback's strength against a basket of six currencies, was trading marginally down by 0.15 per cent at 98.17.
Brent crude, the global oil benchmark, was trading 0.38 per cent higher at USD 61.08 per barrel in futures trade.
“With early-year liquidity still thin and domestic fundamentals offering a mixed but stable backdrop, the rupee appears set to remain range-bound in the near term. As long as USD/INR stays below the 90 handle, the balance of risks tilts mildly in favour of the rupee,” CR Forex Advisors MD Amit Pabari said, adding that against this backdrop, USD/INR is expected to trade in a 89.30–90.20 range.
On the domestic equity market front, the 30-share benchmark index Sensex climbed 158.19 points to 85,34

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Parallel GST show-cause notices on same transaction: State action barred once CGST proceedings begin u/s 6(2)(b)
Case-Laws
GST
Where CGST authorities have already initiated proceedings on a given subject matter, the State GST authorities lack jurisdiction to commence parallel/dual proceedings on the same subject matter, being barred by Section 6(2)(b) of the CGST Act. Applying this statutory bar and the binding principle that only the originally seized GST authority can proceed further

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Input tax credit claim denied for late return filing; decision allows regularisation on documents, with rectification option directed.
Case-Laws
GST
Denial of input tax credit solely on the ground of belated filing of returns was held unsustainable where the taxpayer can substantiate entitlement through requisite documents. The authority was directed to consider the statutory intervention permitting regularisation of the default in return filing and to pass appropriate orders to regular

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Exported group support services and accumulated ITC refund dispute: “intermediary services” label rejected; refund denial quashed u/s16
Case-Laws
GST
Refund of accumulated unutilized ITC on export of services was rejected by treating the petitioner's zero-rated supplies under s.16 IGST Act as “intermediary services.” On construing the service agreement with the foreign group entity and considering consistent refund sanctions under pre- and post-GST regimes along with binding precedent,

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST recovery u/s79(1)(f) after ignored show-cause notice; adjudication set aside for final reply chance with costs
Case-Laws
GST
Recovery proceedings were initiated under s.79(1)(f) pursuant to an order under s.73 of the KGST Act, 2017, passed after the noticee failed to file a reply to the show-cause notice or contest the proceedings. The court held that where non-participation is pleaded to be due to bona fide reasons, unavoidable circumstances, and sufficient cause, a justice-oriente

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Electronic credit ledger blocking u/r 86A and alleged fake ITC claims quashed for no hearing and no reasons
Case-Laws
GST
Blocking of the petitioner's Electronic Credit Ledger under Rule 86A was held invalid because the authority neither granted a pre-decisional hearing nor recorded independent, cogent “reasons to believe” as mandated by Rule 86A. Reliance merely on enforcement reports amounted to impermissible borrowed satisfaction, and the order contained only vague assertions of ITC

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =