Goods and Services Tax

Electronic Cash Ledger Payment Directive Upheld: Administrative Order Survives Constitutional Challenge Without Procedural Irregularities
Case-Laws
GST
SC dismissed the Special Leave Petition challenging an administrative directive regarding electronic cash ledger payment mandates. The constitutional challenge under Article 14 was rejected after noting the recent deletion of CGST Rule 96(10) in 2024. The HC's original order remained undisturbed, with the court finding no procedural or substantive irregularities warranting judicial intervention in the electronic payment mechanism. The petition challenging the arbitrary administrative instruction was consequently unsuccessful, maintaining the existing regulatory framework for tax compliance through electronic credit ledger mechanisms.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Seizure of Mentha Oil Upheld: GST Act Sections 35, 73/74 Govern Accounting Discrepancies and Tax Determination
Case-Laws
GST
HC dismissed the writ petition challenging seizure of unaccounted mentha oil and caustic soda. The court held that under GST Act, section 35 mandates proper accounting of goods, and when discrepancies are found, sections 73/74 shall apply for tax determination. Section 130 cannot be invoked for proceedings related to excess stock discovered during survey. Precedents from previous judgments, including the court's own ruling in M/s Vijay Trading Company and subsequent SC orders, consistently affirmed that section 130 is inapplicable in such scenarios. The court found no merit in the challenge and dismissed the petition, upholding the original seizure and penalty orders.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Input Tax Credit Denied for Unsold Inventory at GST Transition, Precedent Limits Dealer's Retrospective Credit Claims
Case-Laws
GST
HC held that a registered dealer cannot claim Input Tax Credit (ITC) for goods remaining in closing stock that were not re-sold before GST regime introduction. The court determined that since the goods were unsold at the transition point (1.7.2017), the dealer cannot treat the input tax as credit. The judgment affirmed that GST Act's implementation effectively terminated ITC entitlements under the previous VAT Act for unsold inventory. By referencing precedent in S/S Janki Industries, the court conclusively ruled against the dealer's claim, allowing revision and denying ITC carry-forward for unsold stock.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Anticipatory Bail Denied: Applicant Linked to Fictitious Firm Fails to Secure Pre-Arrest Relief Under GST Inquiry
Case-Laws
GST
HC denied transit anticipatory bail for applicant associated with a non-existent firm facing GST inquiry summons. The court emphasized that pre-arrest bail should typically be sought in the jurisdictional court. Transit anticipatory bail is an exceptional remedy, not routinely granted. The application was dismissed due to applicant's absence during hearing and lack of exceptional circumstances justifying pre-arrest bail relief. The court referenced SC precedent highlighting the limited scope of transit anticipatory bail, underscoring that such relief requires demonstrable prejudice to the accused that cannot be addressed through standard legal mechanisms.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Digital Signatures Critical: GST Show Cause Notice Invalidated for Procedural Defect in Signature Authentication Process
Case-Laws
GST
HC ruled that the show cause notice under section 73 and Form GST DRC-01A were procedurally invalid due to absence of digital signatures as mandated by Rule 26(3) of Jharkhand GST Rules, 2017. The court found the notices and subsequent order (Annexure-7 and 8) vitiated by the signature defect. While setting aside these documents, the HC granted liberty to respondents to reinitiate proceedings correctly, ensuring proper digital authentication, providing opportunity for reply, and passing a reasoned order in compliance with legal requirements.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Legal Challenge Succeeds: GST Registration Cancellation Invalidated Due to Procedural Defects in Show Cause Notice
Case-Laws
GST
HC found the show cause notice procedurally defective due to lack of critical administrative details, rendering the GST registration cancellation order invalid. The notice failed to specify the issuing authority's name, designation, and hearing particulars. The cancellation order was deemed cryptic and demonstrated non-application of mind. Consequently, the HC set aside the show cause notice, cancellation orders, and recovery notice. The court permitted respondents to initiate fresh proceedings with a properly drafted show cause notice, ensuring due process and providing the petitioner full opportunity for personal hearing and representation.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST Registration Cancellation Quashed: Authorities Violated Natural Justice by Improper Notice and Hearing Procedure
Case-Laws
GST
HC allowed petitioner's writ challenging GST registration cancellation. The ex parte order was found non-speaking and violated principles of natural justice. The court held that show cause notice uploaded on GST portal without adequate communication constituted procedural impropriety. Statutory authorities failed to provide reasonable opportunity of hearing. Court set aside cancellation order, restored petitioner's GST registration, and directed concerned authority to accept belated returns within three months. The order emphasized constitutional protection under Article 19(1)(g) and quasi-judicial function requirements in administrative proceedings.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Transshipment Penalty Dismissed: Technical Portal Errors Not Sufficient Grounds for Direct Writ Challenge, Appellate Remedy Preferred
Case-Laws
GST
HC dismissed the writ petition on grounds of alternative remedy being available. The petitioner challenged penalty and e-way bill validity arising from technical portal errors during transshipment due to vehicle breakdown. Despite contentions regarding bill extension and portal glitches, the court held that the appellate authority remains competent to examine all substantive and procedural aspects if an appeal is filed in accordance with law. The petition was consequently rejected, emphasizing exhaustion of statutory remedies before seeking extraordinary writ jurisdiction.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Air Conditioning and Fire Extinguishing Systems Lease Ruling Sent Back for Comprehensive Tax Classification Review
Case-Laws
GST
The AAAR remanded the case to the WBAAR for a fresh determination of the tax classification for leasing/rental services involving air conditioning and fire extinguishing systems. The appellate authority found that the previous ruling cannot be considered a binding precedent, as advance rulings are specific to individual applicants under Section 103 of the CGST Act, 2017. The case requires a comprehensive examination of the contractual agreement to ascertain the precise nature of asset use and whether the items constitute goods or become part of immovable property. The AAAR directed the WBAAR to conduct a detailed reassessment, considering all relevant aspects, including the existing 28% GST payment, and issue a new ruling.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Water Quality Management Contracts Clarified: Tax Exemption Based on Service Composition and Goods Percentage Threshold
Case-Laws
GST
The AAR determined the tax classification for various water quality management service contracts. Pure services involving operation, maintenance, consultancy, and management without goods supply qualify for tax exemption under Notification No. 12/2017-Central Tax (Rate). Contracts involving composite supplies with goods exceeding 25% of contract value will be taxed differently. Specific work orders were analyzed, distinguishing between pure services (exempt), composite supplies (partially taxable), and pure goods supply (fully taxable). The ruling emphasized the constitutional context of water management services under Articles 243G and 243W, providing a nuanced interpretation of service and goods classification for tax purposes.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Landmark GST Ruling: Construction Services Taxed at 18% with Land Value Deduction, No Special Exemptions Apply
Case-Laws
GST
The AAR ruled that GST on construction work for prospective clients is liable at 18% under SAC 9954, with a 1/3 deduction for land portion. The transaction does not qualify for lower tax rates or exemption under accommodation services. Monthly/annual maintenance charges are also subject to 18% GST under SAC 9995. The ruling clarifies that sub-leasing or assignment of constructed property does not constitute a 'sale' and does not trigger alternative tax treatment. The decision emphasizes strict interpretation of lease terms and GST applicability on construction and maintenance services.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Refund Claim Rejected: Unutilized CENVAT Credit Challenge Fails Under Statutory Interpretation and Precedent
Case-Laws
GST
HC dismissed writ appeal challenging refund application under Section 142(3) for unutilized CENVAT credit. The court upheld the Single Judge's ruling, finding the refund claim unsustainable based on Supreme Court precedent and existing statutory provisions. The appellant's arguments regarding refund under Section 55 of CGST Act were rejected as futile. The court determined no interference was warranted with the original judgment, thereby conclusively dismissing the appeal and maintaining the lower court's decision against the refund claim.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Taxpayer Wins Relief: Authorities Must Align GSTR-1 and GSTR-3B Forms Within One Month, Resolve Grievances Promptly
Case-Laws
GST
HC allowed the writ petition concerning tax return discrepancies between GSTR-1 and GSTR 3B. The court directed tax authorities to rectify the GSTR 3B form in alignment with GSTR-1 contents within one month, mandating the petitioner to submit a manual application. The authorities were further instructed to address any consequential grievances within two months, effectively permitting correction of administrative errors in tax documentation and providing procedural relief to the taxpayer.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Liberty to Appeal Under CGST Act Section 107 Granted with Mandatory Pre-Deposit and Merit-Based Adjudication
Case-Laws
GST
HC granted petitioner liberty to file appeal under Section 107 of CGST Act by 15th July, 2025, with mandatory pre-deposit. The court permitted appellate remedy to be adjudicated on merits without limitation bar. The pending decision in Quest Infotech case regarding consolidated show cause notice across multiple financial years shall potentially bind appellate proceedings. The court emphasized procedural compliance and principles of natural justice while addressing fraudulent ITC availment and goods-less invoice issues.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Supreme Court Orders Recovery of Missing Administrative Files, Directs Certified Copies and Document Handover for Comprehensive Case Resolution
Case-Laws
GST
SC directed the respondent department to furnish certified copies of three lost original files (File nos. 11-13), while maintaining all existing legal contentions. For original file nos. 1-10, the department agreed to hand over the documents, with the assessee required to collect them from the concerned department. All pending applications were consequently disposed of, resolving the document retrieval dispute through a balanced procedural approach.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Statutory GST Show Cause Notices Upheld: Complex Transactions Require Detailed Computation for Multiple Parties
Case-Laws
GST
HC dismissed the writ petition challenging the issuance of GST show cause notices (FORM DRC-01 and DRC-02). The court held that when multiple parties are involved in complex transactions, the show cause notice providing computation details for each noticee is sufficient. The court declined to intervene in ongoing adjudication proceedings, emphasizing the limited scope of writ jurisdiction under Article 226. The statutory proceedings against the petitioners shall continue in accordance with established legal protocols, with the court refraining from examining the veracity of departmental statements at this stage.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Freight Forwarding Services Refund Claim Upheld: Full ITC Refund and Interest Ordered Under Section 54(11)
Case-Laws
GST
HC ruled in favor of the petitioner, directing release of refund claim and applicable interest for unutilized Input Tax Credit (ITC) related to freight forwarding services. The court held that under Section 54(11) of CGST Act, 2017, the department cannot withhold refund without a pending appeal challenging the Appellate Authority's order. The refund must be released with statutory interest, subject to potential future departmental appeal. The decision follows precedent establishing that standalone departmental opinion cannot justify refund withholding.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Taxpayer Must Comply with GST Circular 224/18/2024, Pre-Deposit Mandatory Under Section 112(8) for Appellate Rights
Case-Laws
GST
HC held that petitioner must comply with Circular No. 224/18/2024-GST by making pre-deposit under Section 112(8) of CGST Act and filing a mandatory undertaking/declaration with proper jurisdictional officer. Petitioner demonstrated willingness to submit required documentation. Writ petition disposed of, granting liberty to petitioner to file the requisite undertaking/declaration in accordance with the circular's stipulations, thereby preserving potential appellate rights pending Appellate Tribunal's formal constitution.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Electronic Credit Ledger Unblocked: Rule 86A Challenge Succeeds After Procedural Flaws Expose Lack of Fair Hearing
Case-Laws
GST
HC allows petition challenging blocking of electronic credit ledger under Rule 86A of CGST Rules. The court found the impugned order invalid due to lack of pre-decisional hearing and absence of cogent reasons. The order invoking Section 86A was quashed, directing immediate unblocking of the electronic credit ledger. Respondents retain liberty to proceed against petitioner in accordance with law. Petitioner mandated to appear before respondent on specified date, with automatic revival of proceedings if non-compliance occurs.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Simultaneous Proceedings Challenged, Petitioner Granted Relief Under Sections 70 and 74, to proceed before Central Authority only
Case-Laws
GST
HC allows petition challenging simultaneous GST proceedings, quashing the SCN issued by state authorities under Section 70 and Section 74. The court directed the petitioner to file reply before the central GST authority, considering recent circulars and precedential judgments. The key relief includes: (i) quashing of impugned SCN, (ii) liberty to file comprehensive reply, and (iii) mandate for respondent to reconsider claims in accordance with recent GST circulars and judicial interpretations, particularly regarding input tax credit and valuation for tax payment.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST official nabbed for taking Rs 45,000 from Noida bizman
GST
Dated:- 20-5-2025
PTI
Noida, May 20 (PTI) A GST official was caught red handed while taking a bribe of Rs 45,000 from a Noida-based businessman on Monday, police said.
The arrest was made by the Vigilance Team, Meerut Sector. A case has been registered against the GST officer at Knowledge Park Police Station in Greater Noida, they said.
Pramod Tiwari, the complainant, claimed that his firm's VAT and GST have been deposited in the concerned department on time. However, on April 29, he received a call from a person, Bhudev, who told him that the assessment of the year 2016-17 and 2017-18 is pending, they said.
Along with this, Tiwari was also asked to deposit the

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Tax Compliance Clarity: Section 128A MGST Act Explains Eligibility, Payment Processes, and Dispute Resolution Mechanisms
Circulars
GST – States
The trade circular addresses key interpretative issues regarding Section 128A of the MGST Act, 2017, specifically clarifying two critical points: (1) taxpayers who paid taxes through GSTR-3B before 1st November 2024 remain eligible for benefits under Section 128A, subject to proper officer verification; and (2) for notices/orders spanning periods partially within and outside Section 128A's scope, taxpayers can file specific forms (SPL-01/SPL-02) after paying tax liability for covered periods, with appellate authorities empowered to adjudicate remaining periods appropriately. The circular aims to provide uniform implementation guidance for tax dispute resolution.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Procedural Defects in GST Assessment Undermine Liability of penalty Determination Under Section 122(2)(b)
Case-Laws
GST
HC determined that the imposition of penalty under Section 122(2)(b) of the GST Act, 2017 was procedurally flawed due to non-compliance with Rule 142(1A) regarding communication of tax details. The court found the tax liability determination for July 2017 to March 2019 legally erroneous. As an interim measure, the court directed the petitioner to deposit 20% of the tax amount determined in the original order within two weeks, with a consequent restraint on coercive recovery measures by the tax authorities pending further adjudication.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Provisional Bank Account Attachment Under Section 83 Quashed Due to Lack of Substantive Revenue Risk Evidence
Case-Laws
GST
HC quashed the provisional attachment of petitioner's bank account under Section 83 of CGST Act, 2017. The court found the respondents' action arbitrary, lacking substantive evidence of revenue risk. Despite petitioner's non-cooperation in show cause proceedings, the attachment was deemed invalid as the authorities failed to demonstrate a reasonable apprehension of revenue default. The court emphasized that provisional attachment requires cogent material basis and cannot be justified by mere procedural non-compliance. The impugned order was set aside, with directions to immediately de-freeze the petitioner's bank account, reinforcing the principle that administrative powers must be exercised with due diligence and proportionality.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Taxpayer Wins GST Address Amendment Rights with One-Month Window and Guaranteed Input Tax Credit Unblocking
Case-Laws
GST
HC granted the petitioner an opportunity to submit documentation for amending GST registration address within one month. The court mandated a personal hearing and directed that the address change application be processed within three months. Any blocked Input Tax Credit shall be unblocked. The order does not impact other potential proceedings related to the petitioner's GSTN number, effectively disposing of the writ petition with procedural directives for rectification.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =