Author: admin_gst

CBIC cautions against fraudsters issuing fake and fraudulent Summons for GST violations
GST
Dated:- 24-1-2025

Taxpayers can verify online any communication from DGGI or any office of CGST by using the 'VERIFY CBIC-DIN' window on the CBIC's website https://esanchar.cbic.gov.in/DIN/DINSearch
In case of suspicion of bogus summons, taxpayers may immediately report to DGGI / CGST formations
It has been recently observed that some individuals with fraudulent intent are creating and sending fake summons to the taxpayers who may or may not be under investigation by the Directorate General of GST Intelligence (DGGI), Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs (CBIC).
The fake summons resembles very closely with the original due to

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Implementation of mandatory mentioning of HSN codes in GSTR-1 & GSTR 1A
GST
Dated:- 24-1-2025

After successful implementation of Phase-I & Phase-II now Phase-III regarding Table 12 of GSTR-1 & 1A is being implemented, from return period February 2025. In this phase manual entry of HSN has been replaced by choosing correct HSN from given Drop down. Also, Table-12 has been bifurcated into two tabs namely B2B and B2C, to report these supplies separately. Further, validation regarding

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST Rule 96(10) Amendment Through Notification 54/2018 Applies Prospectively From October 2018, High Court Rules.
Case-Laws
GST
HC determined that Notification No. 54/2018-Central Tax amending Rule 96(10) of CGST Rules operates prospectively from October 9, 2018, not retrospectively from October 23, 2017. The court quashed summons, notices, and recovery proceedings initiated based on retrospective application of the notification. Any quantification of alleged erroneous refunds for periods before October 9, 2018, was held invalid and without jurisdiction. The ruling aligned with previous rectification order in Cosmo Films Limited case which corrected the earlier misinterpretation regarding notification's effective date. The decision establishes clear temporal boundaries for enforcement of amended Rule 96(10).
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

High Court Remands ITC Denial Case for Fresh Review u/s 16(5) of GST Acts, Orders Hearing Within 3 Months.
Case-Laws
GST
HC overturned denial of input tax credit (ITC) u/s 16(4) of CGST/SGST Acts. Court acknowledged petitioner's claim regarding eligibility under newly notified Section 16(5). Original order partially set aside specifically concerning ITC denial. Matter remanded to competent authority for fresh consideration in light of Section 16(5) provisions. Authority directed to provide hearing opportunity to petitioner and issue new order within three months of judgment copy receipt. Decision emphasizes procedural fairness and proper application of amended statutory provisions in ITC determinations.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

High Court Directs Re-examination of GST Input Tax Credit u/s 17(5) Following Supreme Court's Functionality Test Guidelines.
Case-Laws
GST
HC held that challenge to vires of Section 17(5)(c) and 17(5)(d) of CGST Act/Punjab GST Act 2017 is no longer res integra following SC's ruling in Safari Retreats case. While SC upheld constitutional validity of these provisions, it directed High Courts to examine functionality test in individual cases. Present petition partially allowed through remand to respondent authorities for re-examination and issuance of speaking order after providing petitioner hearing opportunity. Matter to be evaluated based on functionality test as per SC guidelines.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

High Court: Statement Recording Not Mandatory Before Show Cause Notice u/s 122(1A) of CGST Act 2017.
Case-Laws
GST
HC found no statutory requirement mandating obtaining a statement as a prerequisite for issuing show cause notice u/s 122(1A) of CGST Act, 2017. Petitioner granted 4 weeks to file objections to the notice from receipt of order. Respondents directed to consider objections according to law, providing reasonable hearing opportunity before proceeding with assessment/adjudication. Court explicitly noted no views expressed on merits. Petition disposed of with directions for procedural compliance while preserving petitioner's right to present defense during adjudication process.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Tax Authority Issues Show-Cause Notice for Rs. 16.56 Lakh Short Payment on Commission Income from Jembo Cable Services.
Case-Laws
GST
HC upheld the validity of a show-cause notice (SCN) regarding short payment of tax on commission income of Rs. 16,56,267/-. The authority correctly determined that commission received from M/s. Jembo Cable could not qualify as an exempted service. Court emphasized that SCN represents a preliminary procedural step, ensuring principles of natural justice by allowing petitioner to present evidence and submissions during adjudication. The adjudicating authority must consider all submissions before passing final order. Court found SCN lawful as integral part of tax adjudication process, particularly concerning determination of claimed exemption applicability. Application disposed of accordingly.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

High Court Overturns GST Penalty u/s 129(1), Rules Incomplete E-way Bill Details Not Proof of Tax Evasion.
Case-Laws
GST
HC set aside penalty orders under GST Act Section 129(1) and allowed refund application. The appellate authority's dismissal was deemed unjustified as there was no clear tax evasion intent. While the e-way bill showed dispatch from Durgapur without full supplier details, the court found this omission insufficient to establish evasion, noting the goods moved in the same vehicle (WB 41D 1508) as per both e-way bill and tax invoice. The court emphasized that acceptance of dispatch details in the e-way bill portal's Part-A submission indicated compliance, and mere incomplete supplier information didn't constitute tax evasion intent. The court directed authorities to process refund applications as per law.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

High Court Grants Final Hearing on GST Dispute After 90% Tax Payment, Orders 25% Deposit Under GST Act 2017.
Case-Laws
GST
HC set aside the impugned order dated 26.06.2024 concerning GST tax discrepancies. Despite petitioner having already remitted approximately 90% of disputed taxes, court granted one final opportunity to present objections, adhering to principles of natural justice. Petitioner directed to deposit 25% of disputed tax amount within four weeks from order receipt. Decision balanced statutory compliance under GST Act, 2017 with procedural fairness, ensuring adequate notice and response opportunity. Respondent's counsel raised no objection to this arrangement. Matter concluded with petition disposal, emphasizing administrative law principles of fair hearing and reasonable opportunity.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Kerala High Court Declines Writ Against GST Fraud Investigation u/s 74, Directs Petitioner to Follow Statutory Remedies.
Case-Laws
GST
HC declined to intervene in challenge against ITC blocking u/r 86A(1) of Kerala GST Rules and show cause notice u/s 74 of CGST/KSGST Act. Court determined allegations of fraudulent transactions using fake invoices and supply without actual movement of goods involved disputed factual matters unsuitable for writ jurisdiction under Article 226. Petitioner directed to pursue statutory remedies before designated authorities. The existence of specific allegations regarding fraudulent conduct and fake invoices placed the matter outside scope of constitutional writ jurisdiction, necessitating resolution through prescribed administrative channels.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

High Court Orders 90-Day Deadline for State Authorities to Process GST Refund Claims After Verification Under 2020 Guidelines.
Case-Laws
GST
HC directed State Authorities to process petitioner's GST refund claim after verifying facts and entitlement. The decision stemmed from respondents' inaction despite repeated requests for GST refund collected during contract execution. Court mandated compliance with Central Government orders dated 28.01.2020 and 06.06.2018, along with subsequent relevant orders. The authorities must render appropriate decision within 90 days from order receipt. The disposition emphasizes administrative efficiency in GST refund processing while ensuring proper verification of entitlements under existing governmental directives.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

High Court Orders Fresh Notice for ITC Disallowance Under GST Section 17(5) Due to Lack of Specific Clause Citation.
Case-Laws
GST
HC set aside the order disallowing Input Tax Credit (ITC) u/s 17(5) of GST Act. The revenue authorities failed to specify which clause u/s 17(5) was invoked for ITC disallowance. The court directed authorities to issue fresh notice clearly indicating the applicable clause u/s 17(5), provide reasonable hearing opportunity to the assessee, and proceed according to law. The matter was remanded for fresh consideration with specific instructions to follow proper procedure in determining ITC eligibility. The petition was disposed of with these directions.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Court Orders Release of GST-Seized Goods u/s 129(3) After Petitioner Proves Ownership Through Valid Invoice Documentation.
Case-Laws
GST
HC examined validity of detention and seizure notice under GST Act Section 129(3). Referring to government circular dated 31-12-2018 defining ownership of goods through accompanying documents, court found petitioner was legitimate consignee per invoice for goods transported in truck CG 10 AJ 1477. Given established ownership through proper documentation, HC directed release of seized goods and vehicle to petitioner's interim custody subject to fulfillment of prescribed conditions. Court's ruling emphasized importance of documentary evidence in establishing goods ownership for GST detention cases, affirming petitioner's right to custody based on proper invoice documentation.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

High Court Remands GST Case After Authority Failed to Consider Input Tax Credit Claims From Deregistered Suppliers u/s 74(9.
Case-Laws
GST
HC set aside adjudication order u/s 74(9) of WBGST/CGST Act 2017 and remanded for fresh consideration. The adjudicating authority failed to address key submissions regarding input tax credit claims against supplies from deregistered vendors, particularly concerning retrospective cancellation of supplier registrations and proof of goods movement. The court found procedural deficiencies as the assessing officer did not record findings on precedents cited by assessee. Matter remanded for fresh adjudication with directions to consider all factual issues, legal principles, and grant personal hearing. Appellant permitted to submit fresh reply with supporting documentation and judicial precedents.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST Registration Cancellation Order Quashed: High Court Rules Lack of Hearing Violates Natural Justice u/s 108.
Case-Laws
GST
HC quashed the order cancelling petitioner's GST registration and the appellate authority's dismissal due to violation of natural justice principles, as no opportunity for hearing was provided and no reasons were assigned. Given that appellate dismissal precluded revisional powers u/s 108 of GST Act, matter was remanded to Assessing Officer at show cause notice stage. While petition was partially allowed by setting aside both orders, petitioner's registration remains suspended pending show cause notice disposal. Court emphasized procedural fairness requirements in registration cancellation proceedings under GST framework.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

High Court Approves Input Tax Credit Refund for Compensation Cess on Zero-Rated Supplies Under GST Compensation Act.
Case-Laws
GST
HC allowed refund of Input Tax Credit for compensation cess on zero-rated supplies, overturning the Additional Commissioner's rejection. The court distinguished between Composition Levy under CGST Act and Compensation Cess under Compensation Cess Act, clarifying that circulars dated July 26, 2017, and November 18, 2019, explicitly permit refund of unutilized Compensation Cess credit for zero-rated supplies under LUT. The court emphasized that while Input Tax Credit of Compensation Cess can only be utilized for payment of cess on outward supplies, the refund claim is valid and supported by administrative circulars. The Additional Commissioner's interpretation restricting refund based on Section 2(62) and 2(63) of CGST Act was deemed unsustainable.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

BTL EPC Ltd Secures Back-to-Back Orders Worth ?1200 Crore (including GST) from Adani Power and NTPC
GST
Dated:- 22-1-2025
PTI
Kolkata, India: BTL EPC Ltd, a flagship company of the Shrachi Group, has achieved a significant milestone by securing two back-to-back orders worth a total of ?1,200 Crore (including GST) from Adani Power Ltd and NTPC Limited. These significant wins reaffirm BTL EPC LtdÂ’s leadership in delivering cutting-edge engineering solutions to IndiaÂ’s growing infrastructure and power sectors. BTL EPC Ltd has become synonymous with reliability in the field of material handling EPC projects.
Order from Adani Power Ltd BTL EPC Ltd has been awarded a ?475 crore (including GST) contract for the Complete Coal Handlin

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

h of 18 km, with a capacity of 2,150 tonnes per hour. The project also includes critical infrastructure like transfer towers, reclaim feeders, and electrical substations, with advanced systems for dust suppression, fire safety, and energy-efficient lighting. The entire project is expected to be completed within 22 months.
Recently, the company has successfully completed a project at NTPC Pakri Mines, encompassing mechanical transport and loading arrangements from TP-10 to Banadag Railway Siding for the Pakri Bawradih Coal Mine. The project included the commissioning of two Rapid Loading Systems (RLS) for wagon loading and required extensive civil and structural work, including the construction of ground hoppers.
A Vision for Excellence

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

catering to key sectors such as power, steel, fertiliser, and mining. With over 60 years of engineering expertise, the company has successfully executed more than 30 large-scale projects and achieved ?641 crore in revenue for FY 2023-24. With pending order book exceeding ?2,200 crore, BTL EPC Ltd remains committed to delivering innovative, high-quality, and sustainable solutions that drive IndiaÂ’s industrial growth.
With advanced engineering, a focus on timely delivery, and a commitment to excellence, BTL EPC Ltd has cemented its position as a leader in the infrastructure and industrial sectors. With its unwavering focus on engineering excellence, timely execution, and sustainable practices, BTL EPC Ltd continues to build its legacy as a

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Minutes: GST Council Forms Group to Review State Revenue Impact and Compensation Cess Structure Beyond 2026.
Circulars
GST
The GST Council approved formation of a GoM on restructuring Compensation Cess to examine revenue impacts on states post-GST implementation. Key points: Karnataka raised concerns about revenue loss of approximately 0.7% of GSDP despite higher GST collections and growth rates compared to national average. The state clarified this was due to being a producer state under destination-based taxation. The Council agreed to form a GoM chaired by Minister of State (Finance) to: – Analyze state-wise revenue data considering COVID-19 impacts – Review compensation cess structure beyond March 2026 – Examine challenges faced by manufacturing states – Consider solutions within GST's destination-based framework Pre vs Post-GST comparison shows: – Pre-GST (2012-16): 8.3% growth rate, 11.5% GDP growth, 0.72 tax buoyancy – Post-GST (2018-23): 12.3% growth rate, 9.8% GDP growth, 1.25 tax buoyancy The GoM will submit detailed analysis and recommendations for Council's consideration before compensation cess expires in March 2026.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ITC indefeasible if not utilized, interest u/s 50(3) requires actual utilization (3).
Case-Laws
GST
The HC held that validly availed input tax credit (ITC) is indefeasible unless utilized improperly. The imposition of interest u/s 50(3) requires actual utilization of the credit. Since the petitioner had not utilized the accumulated ITC after the cut-off date, the imposition of interest as per the impugned circular could not be justified. The petition was allowed.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST Registration Cancellation: Prospective Effect Upheld, Retrospective Cancellation Quashed.
Case-Laws
GST
The HC quashed the retrospective cancellation of the petitioner-assessee's GST registration, relying on Riddhi Siddhi Enterprises v. Commissioner of Goods and Services Tax (CGST), South Delhi & Anr. It held that in the absence of the show cause notice embodying an intent for retrospective cancellation, the cancellation shall be effective from the date of issuance of the show cause notice, not retrospectively.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

State can't skip primary service of notice modes, must follow Section 169 for valid GST notices.
Case-Laws
GST
The HC held that Section 169 of the Tamil Nadu GST Act mandates service of notices on assessees either in person, by registered post, or to the registered email ID as alternative modes. Only upon failure or impracticability of these modes can the State make publication of notices/orders on the web portal or newspaper as an additional step. Mere uploading on the portal without attempting the primary modes violates principles of natural justice. The impugned assessment orders were set aside and remanded to comply with Section 169 requirements.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

HC grants interim bail in alleged GST evasion case; questions arrest without tax liability determination.
Case-Laws
GST
HC granted interim bail to petitioner arrested u/s 132(1)(c) CGST Act for alleged GST evasion by falsely claiming ITC. HC found no determination of tax liability by authorities to justify “reasons to believe” for arrest at investigation stage. Despite powers u/s 69, continued detention wasn't warranted as petitioner cooperated and no risk of absconding. Bail granted with conditions.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Director Granted Bail in GST Fraud Case After Undertaking to Pay Rs. 2 Crore Tax.
Case-Laws
GST
HC granted regular bail to the applicant Director of M/s Nandeshwari Steel Co. in a case involving fraudulent availment of ITC and issuance of fraudulent invoices by non-existent suppliers. The applicant undertook to pay Rs. 2 crores GST amount in two installments. Considering the offence punishable up to 5 years, completed investigation, principle of bail being the rule and jail an exception under Article 21, and the time required for trial commencement, HC allowed regular bail.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Jurisdictional Issues Raised on Extended Limitation Period, GST Rate for Product.
Case-Laws
GST
The HC held that invoking the extended period of limitation u/s 74 of the CGST Act is a jurisdictional aspect in the present case. The petitioner has been paying GST at 5% under Entry No. 181-A for the product in question since 2017, while paying higher GST at 12% for different products. As Entry No. 181-A is not different from the similarly worded sub-heading 3003.31 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985, which has been repeatedly interpreted contrary to the allegations in the show cause notice, the aspect of invoking the extended period requires consideration along with the binding nature of the GST Council's deliberations. The HC found the issues raised to be jurisdictional and issued notice for further consideration.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Detained goods can be provisionally released under GST Act 2017 Section 129(1)(c) and Rule 140 on bond, bank guarantee.
Case-Laws
GST
The HC held that u/s 129(1)(c) of the GST Act, 2017 read with Rule 140, detained goods can be provisionally released upon executing a bond in Form GST MOV-08 and furnishing a bank guarantee equivalent to the applicable tax, interest and penalty. The petitioner was directed to take steps accordingly and approach the Appellate Authority u/s 107.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =