Author: admin_gst

Tax Dispute Resolved: Consolidated Show Cause Notice Upheld, Petitioner Granted Right to Challenge Order Under Section 74
Case-Laws
GST
HC adjudicated a tax dispute involving procedural irregularities in service of show cause notice (SCN). The court found that a consolidated SCN was issued across multiple financial years under Section 74 of the Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017, addressing short payment and input tax credit issues. Despite no prior hearing notice to the Petitioner, the court held that the Petitioner retains the right to submit arguments and challenge the impugned order. The petition was disposed of, allowing the Petitioner procedural opportunities to present their case in subsequent proceedings.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Judicial Review Mandates Enhanced Communication Protocols for Efficient Legal Proceedings and Transparent Administrative Processes
Case-Laws
GST
HC adjudicated a procedural matter concerning natural justice principles, specifically addressing communication deficiencies in legal proceedings. The court mandated the Registry to implement communication protocols for efficient case processing within the CGST Department. Key directives included: deputizing two officers from CGST and CX Delhi Zone for immediate instructions, publishing email addresses of Commissionerates in cause lists, and requiring specific Commissionerate names in writ petitions. The court emphasized improved communication mechanisms to enhance legal service delivery and transparency. Petition was disposed of with procedural recommendations for future case management.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Procedural Fairness Prevails: Rectification Order Quashed for Denying Petitioner's Right to Be Heard and Fundamental Hearing Principles
Case-Laws
GST
HC held that the rectification application was improperly processed due to violation of principles of natural justice by denying the petitioner an opportunity of hearing. Relying on prior judicial precedent, the court set aside the original order dated 28th February, 2025 and directed that the rectification application be reconsidered after providing a proper hearing to the petitioner in accordance with established legal principles. The petition was consequently disposed of with instructions for procedural compliance.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Legal Challenge Succeeds: Notice Invalidated Due to Procedural Flaws and Violation of Natural Justice Principles
Case-Laws
GST
HC allowed the petition challenging the SCN issued beyond prescribed limitation period. The court found procedural irregularities in the notice, specifically the lack of opportunity for hearing, which violated principles of natural justice. The impugned order was set aside and remanded back to the Adjudicating Authority. The Petitioner was granted permission to file a reply by 15th July, 2025, with a mandatory personal hearing to be provided thereafter. The challenge to the extension of limitation through Notification 56/2023 remains pending before the Supreme Court, which influenced the HC's decision to provide procedural fairness.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ITC Claim Blocked: Advance Ruling Denied Due to Ongoing Investigation Under Section 98(2) First Proviso
Case-Laws
GST
AAR rejected the advance ruling application concerning Input Tax Credit (ITC) entitlement for commercial property leasing. The ruling determined that prior investigative proceedings precluding the advance ruling application triggered Section 98(2) first proviso. Specifically, summons issued before the ruling application and taxpayer's submission of ITC details demonstrated existing proceedings on the identical issue. The investigation's commencement, even without a show cause notice, constitutes legal proceedings that prevent subsequent advance ruling. Consequently, the application was formally rejected to safeguard potential adjudication processes and prevent procedural complications in tax assessment.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST Liability Payment Approved in Instalments, Authorities Directed to Review Petitioner's Financial Constraints Within 3 Weeks
Case-Laws
GST
HC allowed the petitioner's application for GST liability payment in instalments under Section 80 of CGST Act, directing respondent authorities to consider the representation within three weeks. The court recognized the petitioner's financial constraints and mandated a reasoned decision on the instalment request, subject to interest payment under Section 50. The outstanding tax liability of Rs. 4,74,00,293.26 shall be evaluated for potential phased payment, with the petitioner required to submit a certified order copy to authorities within one week of the judgment.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Bank Account Attachment Order Lifted After Procedural Review of Tax Dispute Under CGST Act Section 107
Case-Laws
GST
HC adjudicated a tax dispute involving procedural challenges to bank account attachment under CGST Act. The court determined that subsequent appellate proceedings and Supreme Court's prior intervention rendered the original bank account freezing order unsustainable. Given the petitioner's utilization of statutory appellate remedies under Section 107 and the progression of underlying show cause notice proceedings, the court ruled to automatically lift the bank account attachment order dated 28th May, 2024. The petition was consequently disposed of, effectively restoring the petitioner's financial operational capacity.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Tax Notification 56/2023 Struck Down: Limitation Period Extension Invalidated, Demand Order Nullified Under Section 168A CGST Act
Case-Laws
GST
HC invalidated Notification No. 56/2023-Central Tax, which extended limitation periods under Section 168A of CGST Act for financial years 2018-19 and 2019-20. The court found the notification legally unsustainable, effectively setting aside the time limitation extension and consequently nullifying the subsequent demand order of Rs. 1,20,01,973 raised against the petitioner. The ruling emphasizes judicial scrutiny of administrative tax notifications and their compliance with statutory provisions, ultimately protecting the registered assessee's procedural rights by quashing the impugned notification.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Tax Credit Challenge Dismissed: Systematic Fraud Allegations Expose Fictitious Input Tax Credit Claims Under Scrutiny
Case-Laws
GST
HC dismissed the writ petition challenging tax credit demand, finding systematic fraudulent ITC availing by the petitioner. The key supplier M/s Fortune Graphics Limited was untraceable, with its director admitting no actual goods supply occurred. While declining immediate judicial intervention, the HC permitted the petitioner to pursue appellate remedies under Section 107, mandating pre-deposit by 15th July, 2025. The court noted the need for detailed factual scrutiny regarding specific entity's ITC claims, which exceeded writ jurisdiction's scope. The petition was disposed of, allowing potential appellate challenge subject to prescribed legal procedures.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST Ruling Clarifies Silver Transactions: Barter as Supply, Job Work Exemptions, and HSN Code Guidelines
Case-Laws
GST
The AAR ruled on multiple GST-related queries concerning silver transactions. Key holdings include: barter exchanges constitute 'supply' under GST law, even without monetary transactions. Reverse Charge Mechanism (RCM) does not apply to job work by unregistered individuals. HSN codes were specified for various silver materials: Silver Scrap (7112), Melted Silver Rods (7106). E-way bill requirements were clarified, exempting inter-state and intra-state (Tamilnadu) movements of silver goods under Chapter 71. Procedural queries regarding packaging, insurance values, and payment methods were deemed outside the scope of GST ruling, and thus not addressed. The ruling primarily focused on clarifying GST applicability and documentation requirements for silver-related transactions.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Goods Detention Case: Conditional Release Granted with 25% Deposit, Bank Guarantee, and Personal Bond for Remaining Demand
Case-Laws
GST
HC granted relief in goods detention case, directing respondents to release detained conveyance and goods upon petitioner depositing 25% of goods value (Rs. 2,56,965) and furnishing bank guarantee for 75% (Rs. 7,70,895), along with executing a personal bond for remaining demand. The court's decision was based on petitioner's specific submissions and aligned with precedential judicial interpretation, effectively resolving the dispute by imposing conditional release mechanisms that balance statutory compliance and procedural fairness.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST Show Cause Notice Upheld: Procedural Technicality Cannot Override Substantive Legal Communication Under Section 73
Case-Laws
GST
HC rejected the petition challenging a GST show cause notice, holding that an inadvertent misdescription in document title does not invalidate its substantive content. The court found the document clearly identifiable as a valid Section 73 notice through portal description, watermarks, and accompanying context. The ex-parte order was deemed sustainable, emphasizing that procedural errors do not negate the fundamental legal communication. The petitioner's attempt to challenge the notice based on title discrepancy was considered frivolous. Consequently, the court upheld the departmental proceedings and disposed of the petition, affirming the tax authority's right to issue notices despite minor formal inconsistencies.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Legal Challenge Succeeds: Show Cause Notice Invalidated for Violating Natural Justice and Procedural Fairness Principles
Case-Laws
GST
HC quashed the summary of show cause notice and order for procedural violations under AGST Act, 2017. The court found that issuing a summary notice without providing an opportunity of hearing constituted a breach of natural justice principles. Following precedent in a similar case, the HC set aside the impugned orders and granted authorities liberty to initiate de novo proceedings under Section 73, if deemed appropriate. The decision emphasizes procedural fairness and the requirement of proper legal process in tax determination proceedings.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

HC Quashes SCN 09/2023 Due to Notice Service Flaws, Grants Petitioner Fresh Opportunity to Respond
Case-Laws
GST
HC remanded the matter concerning SCN No. 09/2023 due to procedural irregularities in notice service. The court noted that prior to 16th January 2024, show cause notices were uploaded in 'Additional Notices Tab', potentially preventing proper access. Considering the petitioner did not receive adequate opportunity to be heard, the HC directed the adjudicating authority to provide fresh notice. The petitioner was granted time until 15th July 2025 to file reply, with a mandatory personal hearing to be scheduled after submission. The original impugned order was set aside, and 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

= = = = = = = =

Tax Credit Dispute: Appellate Path Opened with Nuanced Pre-Deposit Guidelines for Challenging Ineligible Input Tax Claims
Case-Laws
GST
HC held that the demand for ineligible input tax credit used for discharging outward tax liability involves potential duplication of demands. The court relegated the petitioner to the Appellate Authority, permitting appeal filing by 15th July, 2025, with pre-deposit mandated only for specific demand paragraphs. The court directed that any existing deposits by the petitioner shall be adjusted against the required pre-deposit, effectively providing procedural relief while maintaining tax compliance requirements.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Taxpayers Gain Relief: Section 128A Clarifies GST Payment Procedures and Dispute Resolution Mechanisms for Pre-November 2024 Periods
Circulars
GST – States
Legal Circular Analysis: The circular addresses key interpretative issues regarding Section 128A of the Assam GST Act, 2017, specifically clarifying two critical points. First, taxpayers who paid taxes 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 specific forms (SPL-01/SPL-02) after paying tax liabilities for covered periods, with appellate authorities empowered to adjudicate remaining periods independently. The guidance aims to provide procedural clarity and administrative flexibility in tax dispute resolution, ensuring uniform implementation across tax jurisdictions.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Forged GST Challenge Exposed: Fabricated Docs Lead to Criminal Investigation and Petition Dismissal
Case-Laws
GST
HC found SCNs and affidavits to be forged, with fictitious petitioners submitting fabricated documents challenging GST registration cancellation. Court directed DGGI officials to conduct thorough investigation and file complaint with Crime Branch within one week. Registrar General instructed to lodge complaint against petitioners under relevant sections of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita for forgery and fabrication. Non-bailable warrants discharged subject to petitioner's undertaking to cooperate with DGGI investigation. Petition dismissed, with court emphasizing need for comprehensive legal action against fraudulent documentation.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Bail Granted in Tax Evasion Case: Insufficient Evidence and No Proven Pattern of Deliberate Tax Fraud
Case-Laws
GST
HC granted bail to the respondent in a tax evasion case after 13 days in custody. The court noted the investigation agency has sufficient powers to examine GST department and bank records. The respondent, a Delhi resident, was not shown to be a habitual tax offender. Despite the investigation starting in 2020, no criminal complaint was filed, potentially rendering the respondent eligible for default bail. The court found no evidence of potential misuse of bail liberty. The petition challenging bail was consequently dismissed, affirming the respondent's release.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Services to Intermediary Not Directly Supplied to Government Disqualify Tax Exemption Under Notification 12/2017
Case-Laws
GST
The AAAR determined that the appellant's services do not qualify for tax exemption under Notification No. 12/2017. The key issue centered on service supply conditions, specifically direct service provision to government entities. While the appellant provided manpower services to Webel Technology Limited for a government project, the services were not directly supplied to the government. WTL, as the intermediary, was responsible for payment, thereby disqualifying the services from exemption. Consequently, the appellant failed to meet the requisite conditions for tax exemption, rendering the service supply taxable under the prescribed notification.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

High Court Strikes Down Tax Credit Disallowance Orders, Mandates Comprehensive Reevaluation of Electronic Credit Ledger Compartments
Case-Laws
GST
HC allowed the petition challenging Exhibit-P1 and Exhibit-P2 orders related to ITC disallowance. Relying on the precedent in Rejimon Padickapparambil Alex v. UOI, the court held that electronic credit ledger represents a tax fund with distinct compartments for CGST, IGST, and SGST. The impugned orders were set aside, directing the respondent to reconsider the matter in light of the established legal principles, effectively providing relief to the petitioner by mandating a comprehensive reevaluation of the original tax credit determination.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Procedural Gaps in E-Way Bill Compliance Don't Automatically Trigger Penalties Without Proven Tax Evasion Intent
Case-Laws
GST
HC determined that mere non-completion of part-B of e-way bill does not automatically warrant penalty under Section 129 of U.P. G.S.T. Act, 2017. The court found no evidence of tax evasion attempt by the petitioner. Without a specific finding regarding intentional tax evasion, the penalty levy was deemed unsustainable. Consistent with prior judicial precedents, the court emphasized that procedural non-compliance alone cannot justify punitive action. The impugned order was consequently set aside, and the petition was allowed, effectively quashing the penalty imposed by the tax authorities.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Legal Challenge Upholds Natural Justice: Section 169 Violation Leads to Order Reversal and Procedural Fairness Restoration
Case-Laws
GST
HC allowed the petition in part, finding a violation of natural justice principles. The court set aside orders dated 20.09.2023 and 08.05.2024 for non-compliance with Section 169 of Bihar Goods and Service Act, 2017. The matter was remanded to the concerned authority to issue a fresh summary show-cause notice, providing the petitioner adequate opportunity to respond. The authority was directed to pass a reasoned order and communicate it within six months, recognizing that mere portal uploading of notice is insufficient and requires registered post or alternative communication modes.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Procedural Lapses and Delay Scrutinized: Writ Petition Dismissed Despite Potential Merits of Underlying Claim
Case-Laws
GST
HC held that despite procedural irregularities in serving show-cause notice and adjudication process, the petitioners failed to provide adequate explanation for delay in filing the writ petition. While the court was not inclined to entertain the petition due to unexplained delay, it ensured the petitioners were not left without legal recourse. The writ petition was disposed of, maintaining principles of natural justice while emphasizing procedural compliance and timely legal intervention.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Company Wins Challenge Against Tax Order Due to Procedural Defects and Lack of Substantive Reasoning in Decision-Making Process
Case-Laws
GST
HC held that the CTO's order violated principles of natural justice by failing to provide the Company an opportunity to be heard and not addressing its legal submissions. The order lacked substantive reasoning, which is essential for a legally valid quasi-judicial decision. Consequently, the impugned demand order was set aside as it contravened procedural fairness and Section 75(4) of CGST Act, which mandates granting a hearing before adverse action. Petition allowed, order quashed.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST Registration Cancellation Upheld, Petitioner Granted Appeal Opportunity with Conditional Reactivation by Pre-Deposit
Case-Laws
GST
HC dismissed the writ petition challenging GST registration cancellation, holding that the order does not warrant judicial interference under writ jurisdiction. The court permitted the petitioner to file an appeal before the Appellate Authority by 10th July, 2025, with requisite pre-deposit. Upon filing the appeal and intimating the GST Department, the registration shall be reactivated within 15 days, subject to no outstanding legal impediments. The procedural avenue for challenging the order remains through statutory appellate mechanisms rather than direct judicial intervention.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =