Author: admin_gst

Assessment order quashed for violating Rule 142(1A) CGST Rules 2017; notice required before assessment, remanded for fresh assessment after notice
Case-Laws
GST
The HC allowed the writ petition, holding that the impugned assessment order violated Rule 142(1A) of the CGST Rules, 2017 and principles of natural justice by failing to serve a prior show-cause notice; the Court adhered to its consistent jurisprudence that non-issuance of the requisite notice vitiates the assessment process. T

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Quashed adjudication for lack of natural justice: no show-cause notice, reply deadline, or personal hearing; order vacated with conditions
Case-Laws
GST
The HC quashed and set aside the impugned adjudication order and allowed the writ petition filed by the anonymized petitioner, holding that principles of natural justice were violated because no show-cause notice, filing date for reply, or opportunity for personal hearing was communicated prior to the order; the court noted systemic def

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Rule 86A powers limited to credit shown in Electronic Credit Ledger on date of blocking order; excess credits restored
Case-Laws
GST
The HC held that the powers under Rule 86A of the CGST Rules may be exercised only in respect of input tax credit reflected in the Electronic Credit Ledger on the date of making and serving the impugned blocking order. Applying precedent, the court quashed and set aside the impugned order insofar as it exceeded that scope and directed the Respondents to re

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Statutory and pre-approval claims extinguished on approval under Section 31; post-approval notices and recovery barred
Case-Laws
GST
The HC allowed the petition, quashing and setting aside the impugned order dated 25 February 2025, holding that statutory and other pre-approval claims not incorporated in an approved resolution plan stand extinguished on the date of approval under Section 31, IBC. The court found respondents' issuance and disposal of a show-cause notice post-approval to b

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Bail granted for accused in alleged fraudulent Input Tax Credit case; offences compoundable, documentary evidence reduces need for custody
Case-Laws
GST
The HC allowed the petitioner's regular bail application, observing that alleged offences of fraudulent availment/utilization of Input Tax Credit involve statutory punishments attracting imprisonment up to five years but are compoundable; liability for exact tax evasion remains to be determined by assessment/adjudication. The court foun

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Audit under Section 65 CGST Act held timely; pre-SCN reply period breached, SCN quashed and matter remitted
Case-Laws
GST
HC held that the audit under Section 65 CGST Act was not time-barred: the audit commencement date was fixed as the day after the Petitioner's final submission, mandating conclusion within three months, and the audit report dated 11 Feb 2025 and communicated 13 Feb 2025 was within limitation. Conversely, the show-cause notice issued on 27 Nov 2024 was quashed for brea

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Advisory : Introduction of Import of Goods details in IMS
GST
Dated:- 30-10-2025

The Invoice Management System (IMS) was introduced on the GST portal from the October 2024 tax period. It enables recipient taxpayers to accept, reject, or keep pending their individual records uploaded by their suppliers through GSTR-1/1A/IFF. To further enhance the taxpayer convenience, a new section for “Import of Goods” has been introduced in IMS wherein the Bill of Entry (BoE) filed by the taxpayer

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Advisory to file pending returns before expiry of three years
GST
Dated:- 30-10-2025

As per the Finance Act, 2023 (8 of 2023), dt. 31-03-2023, implemented w.e.f 01-10-2023 vide Notification No. 28/2023 – Central Tax dated 31th July, 2023, the taxpayers shall not be allowed file their GST returns after the expiry of a period of three years from the due date of furnishing the said return under Section 37 ( Outward Supply), Section 39 (payment of liability), Section 44 ( Annual Return) and Section 52 (Tax Collected at Source). These Sections cover GSTR-1, GSR-1A, GSTR 3B, GSTR-4, GSTR-5, GSTR-5A, GSTR-6, GSTR 7, GSTR 8 and GSTR 9 or 9C.
Hence, above mentioned returns will be barred for filing after the expiry of three years from

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Adjudication orders quashed for denying personal hearing under Section 73 GST; orders invalid, remand for fresh proceedings
Case-Laws
GST
The HC held that the impugned adjudication orders dated 31.12.2023 and 23.09.2025 are unsustainable for having been passed without affording personal hearing, thereby violating principles of natural justice under Section 73 of the GST Act. Observing that personal hearing must ordinarily be offered before any adverse adjudicatory order and that waiver

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Transfer of specific construction unit as going concern (SAC 997119) attracts 18% GST but exempt under Notification No.12/2017-CT (Entry No.2)
Case-Laws
GST
The AAR concluded that the proposed transfer of the specific construction-unit by the Applicant to the Transferee constitutes a transfer of a business/going concern rather than addressing the undefined concept of “slump sale.” The supply, when characterized as a going concern, falls under SAC 997119 and ordinarily attracts GST at 18

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Advance ruling allows input tax credit on capital goods and services for transmission works, subject to s.18(6) reversal
Case-Laws
GST
AAR holds that the applicant is entitled to claim input tax credit on capital goods and related services comprising underground cables, electrical equipment, supervision and installation services procured for transmission of electricity from a distribution utility's power station to the factory premises located outside the factory. The AAR accepted that

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

No GST benefit or rate reduction found for three projects; Section 171 CGST not attracted after DGAP report verification
Case-Laws
GST
The AT held that, following consideration of the DGAP report and documentary verification, the DGAP's methodology for apportioning ITC to project costs was appropriate and captured the economic effect of GST implementation. The Tribunal found that no reduction in GST rate nor incremental benefit of Input Tax Credit accrued to the Respondent in respect of

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Provisional bank attachment lifted when petitioner offers immovable property security worth at least Rs.2.07 crore; DRC-23 release required
Case-Laws
GST
HC ordered that the provisional attachment of the Petitioner's bank accounts be lifted upon the Petitioner furnishing immovable property as security valued at or above Rs.2.07 crores, the quantum being sufficient to protect the revenue's interest given the demand. Upon such offer of security, the Respondents must release the attachment

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Petitioner allowed to file appeal under s.107 against January 26, 2025 order despite payment under s.74(9); limitation not barred
Case-Laws
GST
HC dismissed the writ by permitting the Petitioner, who had already paid the penalty levied under s.74(9) of the respective GST enactments, to challenge the impugned order dated 26.01.2025 before the Appellate Authority under s.107 within thirty days from receipt of this judgment. The Appellate Authority is directed to admit and decide the appea

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Order nullified; refund of Rs. 2,58,700 ordered after GST exemption under Entry No.12, Central Tax Notification No.12/2017
Case-Laws
GST
The HC quashed the impugned order directing the petitioner to pay alleged deficit stamp duty and penalty, finding the respondent's determination misconceived insofar as renting/leasing of a residential dwelling is exempt from GST under Entry No. 12 of Central Tax Notification No. 12/2017. The court held the petitioner's challenge meritorious, declared

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Assam govt to donate GST from Zubeen Garg's last film to his foundation
GST
Dated:- 29-10-2025
PTI
Guwahati, Oct 29 (PTI) The Assam government will hand over the state’s share of Goods and Services Tax (GST) from the upcoming Assamese film 'Roi Roi Binale', the last movie of Zubeen Garg, to a foundation set up by the singer for the welfare of the underprivileged.
Addressing a press conference after the cabinet meeting, Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma said there is no entertainment tax on films screened in the state and so there is no question of waiving it as requested by a section of society.
“The state government will exclusively handover its share of the GST realised from the movie to the Kalaguru Artiste Foundation to

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

utra Integrated Flood and Riverbank Erosion Risk Management Project'.
It will be executed through Flood and River Erosion Management Agency of Assam as the project management unit and Water Resources Department and Assam Agroforestry Development Board (AADB) as project implementation units.
“The project will cover 76 km of anti-erosion works, 33 km of embankment work and 17.72 km of pro-siltation works covering around 13 districts. Together both the phases include around 250 km of intervention on Brahmaputra river banks, covering almost 20 per cent of riverbank reach within Assam,” he added.
Sarma said in order to ensure legal recognition and protection of the rights of Moran and Matak communities, the state cabinet has approved the sett

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Tax authority fixes officer designations and monetary limits for issuing show-cause notices/orders under Sections 74A, 75(2), 122; Rule 142(1A).
Circulars
GST
The tax authority assigns specific officer designations as proper officers for Sections 74A, 75(2), 122 of the CGST Act and Rule 142(1A), setting hierarchical monetary limits for issuance of show-cause notices and orders (Superintendent, Deputy/Assistant Commissioner, Additional/Joint Commissioner) and clarifies aggregation rules

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

No anti-profiteering liability under Section 171 CGST Act where no GST rate reduction or ITC benefit arose for projects
Case-Laws
GST
The AT affirmed that, following review of the DGAP report and hearing, no reduction in GST rate nor accrual of benefit from Input Tax Credit arose in respect of the respondent's projects “Gurgaon Hills” and “Grand Hyatt Gurgaon Residences,” and therefore no anti-profiteering liability under Section 171 of the CGST Act, 2017 attached. Consequently, the AT

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Petitions dismissed for lack of maintainability for failing to exhaust statutory remedies on GST assessment under JDA; liberty to appeal
Case-Laws
GST
The HC dismissed the petitions for lack of maintainability, holding that petitioners failed to justify bypassing the statutory requirement to exhaust alternative remedies against assessment orders and had falsely averred the absence of any effective remedy. The Court observed that GST liability under Joint Development Agreements raises fa

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Rejection of s.161 application sustained and s.73 challenge dismissed; respondent to pass fresh order upon compliance
Case-Laws
GST
HC upheld the rejection of the s.161 application and dismissed the challenge to the orders under s.73 of the respective GST enactments insofar as the impugned order dated 25.02.2025 is found to be a detailed adjudicatory determination not warranting exercise of s.161 remedial jurisdiction. The court held that the s.161 rejection is sustainable. The Responde

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Order under u/s 73 quashed for breach of natural justice; matter remitted for fresh assessment in accordance with law
Case-Laws
GST
HC quashed the impugned order passed u/s 73 of the TNGST and CGST Acts, 2017, holding that the assessment/order violated principles of natural justice. The Petitioner had received only notices in Form GST ASMT-10 and DRC-01A dated 16.10.2024 and filed substantive responses on 10.12.2024 and 21.01.2025; copies of the DRC-01 dated 16.11.2024 were not uploaded

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Order quashed; matter remitted to re-determine reduced penalty under section 47(2) for late GSTR-9 under section 44(2) and Rule 80(1A)
Case-Laws
GST
The HC quashed the impugned order dated 10.02.2025 and remitted the matter to the respondent with directions to pass a fresh order levying a reduced penalty under section 47(2) after issuing due notice to the petitioner. The court observed the petitioner failed to furnish the annual return (GSTR-9) for FY 2020-21 beyond the statutory window

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Second show-cause notice upheld where prior demand confirmed but parallel proceedings barred only if identical liability and facts
Case-Laws
GST
The HC refused relief and dismissed the petition, upholding scope for a second show-cause notice where an earlier O-O had confirmed demand based on discrepancies between GSTR-7 and the petitioner's GSTR-1/GSTR-3B for 2018-19. The court applied the twofold test for “same subject matter”: whether an authority has already proceeded on an identical

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Invocation of s.161 confirming tax, interest and penalty breached natural justice by denying in-person hearing; deposit condition ordered
Case-Laws
GST
The HC held that the respondent's invocation of jurisdiction under s.161 of the GST enactments confirming tax, interest and penalty violated the principles of natural justice because the petitioner was not heard in person prior to the impugned order dated 23.08.2024, notwithstanding a written reply filed on 16.08.2024. The court neverthe

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Order quashed and case remanded for fresh GST adjudication after failure to consider no-consideration defense and circulars
Case-Laws
GST
The HC set aside the impugned order assessing GST on the supply of a corporate guarantee furnished by the petitioner to a related entity, finding the assessing officer failed to consider the petitioner's contention that no consideration was received and that applicable circulars applied. The court held non-consideration of a defense renders an adminis

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =