Goods and Services Tax

Writ of Mandamus orders quick disposal of tax appeal filed on unlawful money recovery under relevant laws
Case-Laws
GST
The HC issued a writ of mandamus directing the respondent to expeditiously consider and dispose of the petitioner's appeal filed on 13.02.2025, challenging the order regarding tax imposition and recovery of money allegedly obtained through unlawful means. The Court emphasized the necessity for the appellate authority to act in a time-bound manner and to decide the matter on merits in accordance with law, taking into account relevant judicial precedents cited by the petitioner. The petition was allowed, mandating cooperation from the respondent and ensuring the appeal process proceeds without undue delay.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

High Court Sets Aside Orders Citing Natural Justice Violation, Remands Case for Fresh Hearing
Case-Laws
GST
The HC allowed the petition by setting aside the impugned orders dated 8 June 2018, 17 February 2019, and 4 November 2019, and remanded the matter to the AAR for fresh consideration. The court found a violation of natural justice principles as the Appellate Authority improperly considered the Chartered Engineer's and Customer's Certificates without affording the Respondents an opportunity to challenge the evidence through cross-examination or to present their own evidence. The evidence was first introduced at the appellate stage, depriving the Respondents of a fair chance to contest it. Due to these procedural irregularities and the untested nature of the evidence, the HC deemed it unsafe to rely on the Appellate Authority's decision and directed a rehearing in accordance with law and on merits.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Karnataka Commercial Taxes launches helpline for corruption complaints on UPI bribe demands under GST rules
News
GST
The Commercial Taxes Department in Karnataka has established a helpline to address corruption complaints, particularly involving bribe demands related to UPI transactions. The department received reports that some officials and intermediaries solicited bribes from traders under the guise of assistance. It emphasized a zero-tolerance policy and urged traders to report such incidents. The state government clarified that GST is a central government matter and not under its control. Discussions with the central government are planned regarding tax notices issued to small traders, which have led some to revert to cash transactions and organize protests. State officials attributed responsibility for the challenges faced by small traders to the central government, assuring that the state would take necessary measures to protect traders' interests.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Incorrect GSTR-3A Notices Sent Due to System Error, No Action Needed for Cancelled Registrations Before FY 2024-25
News
GST
Notices in Form GSTR-3A have been mistakenly issued to certain taxpayers, including those with cancelled registrations before the Financial Year 2024-25, due to a system glitch. These notices, typically sent for non-filing of Form GSTR-4 under Section 39(2) of the CGST Act and Rule 68 of the CGST Rules, are not applicable in these cases. The issue is under review, and corrective measures are being implemented. Taxpayers who have filed the return or whose registrations were cancelled before FY 2024-25 should disregard these notices, as no action is required. Any other concerns should be addressed through the Self-Service Portal with relevant details for resolution.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Advisory : Regarding GSTR-3A Notices issued for non-filing of form GSTR 4 to cancelled Composition Taxpayers.
GST
Dated:- 21-7-2025

As per the provisions of Section 39(2) of the Central Goods and Services Tax (CGST) Act, 2017, read with Rule 68 of the CGST Rules, 2017, notices in Form GSTR-3A are required to be issued in cases of non-filing of Form GSTR-4. However, it has come to notice that, due to a system-related glitch, such notices have been inadvertently issued in certain cas

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Petitioner must deposit 15% disputed tax; fresh GST proceedings to follow strict legal rules under Section 74.
Case-Laws
GST
The HC set aside the impugned order dated 20.02.2024 on terms, directing the petitioner to deposit 15% of the disputed tax, noting the petitioner had previously deposited 10% upon filing an appeal against the 05.12.2023 order. The Court acknowledged prior rulings balancing the interests of the assessee and revenue, mandating fresh proceedings strictly in accordance with GST laws, excluding the pendency period from limitation computation. However, this principle was stayed by the Division Bench, and a contrary view from another High Court was noted, holding that jurisdictional challenges to proceedings initiated under the respondent's authority are impermissible even if the prior appeal is allowed. The petition was disposed of following compliance with the deposit condition, thereby affirming the continuation of proceedings subject to statutory adherence and interim financial safeguards.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Extraordinary Jurisdiction Denied Under Article 226 Without Pleadings Justifying Pre-Deposit Waiver
Case-Laws
GST
The HC declined to exercise extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226, holding that the petition challenging an ex facie jurisdictional order is not maintainable in the absence of pleadings justifying waiver of the pre-deposit requirement. The court emphasized that the statutory regime, including pre-deposit, must be adhered to and alternative remedies must be exhausted before invoking writ jurisdiction. Reliance on precedents confirmed that the petitioner failed to demonstrate any exceptional circumstances warranting interference. Consequently, the petition was dismissed, and the petitioner was directed to pursue the efficacious alternate remedy available under the statutory framework. This decision underscores the principle that writ jurisdiction is not a substitute for statutory remedies, especially where the impugned order is passed without jurisdiction and time limitations are applicable.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Refund claim for accumulated ITC allowed; tax demand and penalty orders quashed under relevant legal provisions
Case-Laws
GST
The HC held that the petitioners' refund application for accumulated ITC was within the statutory limitation period, relying on the precedent that struck down the relevant circular provision. Although a refund sanction order was issued, a subsequent demand notice and Order-in-Original confirming a tax demand with penalty were challenged. The court found the impugned orders dated 31.3.2023 and 29.2.2024 illegal and unsustainable, quashing and setting aside both the refund rejection and the appeal order. The petition was allowed, thereby validating the refund claim and negating the subsequent tax demand and penalty.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Orders rejecting rectification under Section 161 GST Act set aside; tax deposit required for reconsideration under Section 128A
Case-Laws
GST
The HC set aside the orders dated 09.06.2025 and 10.06.2025 rejecting the petition for rectification under Section 161 of the GST Act. The petitioner is directed to deposit the tax amount as determined in the assessment order dated 16.02.2022 within one week. Upon timely deposit, the Additional CT & GST Officer shall reconsider the application for waiver of interest and penalty under Section 128A on its own merits. The petition is disposed of accordingly.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Order rejecting GST registration set aside for lack of reasons under Section 29(2)(b) and (c) CGST Act
Case-Laws
GST
The HC set aside the unreasoned order rejecting the petitioner's fresh GST registration application, finding that the Proper Officer failed to record requisite findings under Section 29(2)(b) and (c) of the CGST Act. The Court noted the petitioner had remedies available for revocation of cancellation and appeal but chose to file a fresh application, which is not barred by statute. The rejection order lacked reference to the statutory provisions and did not comply with the circular's requirements. Consequently, the matter was remitted to the Deputy Commissioner for fresh consideration of the registration application in accordance with law. The petitioner's application was allowed by way of remand.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Writ Petition Dismissed for Delay Beyond Limit and Valid GST Portal Notice Under Sections 74, 107, and 169
Case-Laws
GST
The HC dismissed the writ petition on grounds of inordinate delay exceeding three years from the assessment order. The petitioner conceded receipt of the show cause notice via the common GST portal, confirming knowledge of proceedings under Section 74 of the GST Act. The Court emphasized that under Section 107, the appellate authority may condone delay only up to thirty days beyond the prescribed period. Since the petition was filed well beyond this condonable period, it was held to be non-maintainable. Furthermore, service of notice through the GST portal was deemed valid under Section 169 of the GST Act, negating any claim of non-service. Consequently, the writ petition was dismissed for being barred by delay and failure to comply with statutory timelines.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Regular bail granted under GST Act for fraudulent Input Tax Credit claim with conditions for sureties and bond
Case-Laws
GST
The HC granted regular bail to the applicant accused of fraudulent availing of Input Tax Credit without actual movement of goods. Considering the ongoing investigation, the pending complaint, and the prolonged incarceration since 28.03.2025, the Court found that the applicant is entitled to bail. Bail was permitted upon furnishing a personal bond with two local sureties of like sum to the satisfaction of the trial court. The application was allowed subject to these conditions.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Ad Interim Bail Granted to Accused in Fake Input Tax Credit and Illegal Tax Evasion Case Under GST Rules
Case-Laws
GST
The HC granted ad interim bail to the petitioner accused of fraudulent availing of fake Input Tax Credit and illegal tax evasion. The petitioner, associated with two firms, allegedly claimed substantial ITC amounts as per GST returns. The investigation is complete, and a complaint has been filed, with the allegations subject to trial. The petitioner has no criminal antecedents and has been in custody for approximately five months. Considering the facts, completed investigation, and legal precedents cited, the court found the petitioner's counsel made a sufficient case for bail. Consequently, the bail application was allowed.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Arrest under Sections 132(1)(b),(c),(i),132(2),132(5) CGST Act held illegal for violating Article 22(1) and Section 50 Cr.P.C.
Case-Laws
GST
The HC held that the arrest of the Applicant for offences under Sections 132(1)(b), 132(1)(c), 132(1)(i), and 132(2) read with Section 132(5) of the CGST Act was illegal due to non-compliance with Article 22(1) of the Constitution and Section 50 of the Cr.P.C. The DGGI failed to prove that the Applicant was informed of the grounds of arrest at the time of detention, as mandated. Consequently, the Applicant's custodial detention was declared unlawful. The court granted regular bail upon the Applicant executing a P.R. bond of Rs. 1,00,000 with two local sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the CJM, Pune. The bail application was accordingly allowed.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Power to issue writs under Article 226 is plenary but not routine; alternative remedies must be exhausted first
Case-Laws
GST
The HC dismissed the petition, holding that the power to issue prerogative writs under Article 226 is plenary but not to be exercised routinely. The court emphasized that where an efficacious alternative remedy exists, writ jurisdiction is generally not invoked absent extraordinary circumstances, which were not demonstrated here. The issues raised fell within the purview of the competent appellate authority, and the HC refrained from adjudicating on the merits to avoid prejudice. Consequently, the petition was held not maintainable and was dismissed.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Commercial Taxes Dept in Karnataka sets up helpline after bribe complaints
GST
Dated:- 20-7-2025
PTI
Bengaluru, Jul 20 (PTI) The Commercial Taxes Department in Karnataka has launched a dedicated helpline to combat corruption and take strict action against erring staff, particularly in response to complaints about bribe demands related to UPI-linked matters.
The department, in an official statement on Sunday, said it had received information from the media and other sources that certain officers and staff had allegedly “demanded bribes” in connection with UPI-related issues.
It also noted that a few middlemen were demanding money from traders under the “pretext of offering assistance” in such cases.
Taking serious note of the

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

tment.
He clarified that GST is a central government initiative.
“The GST Council functions under the purview of the central government, not the state government. So, how is the state government responsible for it,” Siddaramaiah told reporters in Mysuru.
“We will speak to the Government of India. If there's anything related to the Commercial Taxes Department, we will discuss and take a decision,” he added.
It is also learnt that traders are uniting against UPI and are planning a protest on July 25.
He reiterated that the “state government is not responsible for these developments.” Deputy Chief Minister D K Shivakumar also held the BJP-led central government accountable, saying it was responsible for introducing GST and the “challenge

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Auto-Populated Inter-State Supply Data in GSTR-3B Table 3.2 deferred. Becomes Non-Editable from July 2025
News
GST
From July 2025, the auto-populated values for inter-state supplies in Table 3.2 of GSTR-3B will become non-editable, requiring taxpayers to file GSTR-3B using system-generated data only. Previously, this functionality was deferred, allowing edits for taxpayer convenience. Corrections to any inaccuracies in Table 3.2 must be made by amending the corresponding entries in GSTR-1, GSTR-1A, or IFF for subsequent tax periods. Taxpayers are advised to ensure accurate reporting in these forms to maintain compliance. There is no cut-off date for filing amendments via Form GSTR-1A before filing GSTR-3B, allowing corrections up until the filing of GSTR-3B itself.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Cancellation of GST Registration for Non-Filing Returns Valid Under Section 29(2)(c), Restoration Possible Under Rule 22(4)
Case-Laws
GST
The HC held that cancellation of GST registration under Section 29(2)(c) for non-filing of returns for six continuous months is valid. However, per the proviso to sub-rule (4) of Rule 22 of the CGST Rules, 2017, if the petitioner is willing to furnish all pending returns and pay the due tax along with interest and late fees, the empowered officer may drop the cancellation proceedings and restore the registration by passing an order in Form GST REG-20. The court disposed of the writ petition directing the petitioner to approach the competent authority within two months to seek restoration of GST registration by complying with the statutory requirements.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

HC refuses to quash show cause notice under Section 74 CGST Act, allows petitioner to file reply within two weeks
Case-Laws
GST
The HC declined to exercise extraordinary jurisdiction to quash or modify the show cause notice issued under Section 74 of the CGST Act, 2017, finding no basis to interfere at this stage. The Court held that allegations of suppression of facts could not be dismissed prematurely and must be examined by the issuing authority. The petitioner was permitted to file a reply to the show cause notice within two weeks, which the authority is directed to consider. The petition was disposed of accordingly, with no relief granted against the issuance or content of the notice, thereby preserving the procedural rights of the parties under the CGST Act.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Appellate Authority Can Admit Additional Evidence Under Rule 112(4) of WBGST/CGST Rules 2017
Case-Laws
GST
The HC held that the appellate authority is empowered under Rule 112(4) of the WBGST/CGST Rules, 2017, to admit additional evidence, including documents and witness examination, despite the restrictions in sub-rule (1). The appellate authority's failure to consider this jurisdiction rendered its order mechanical and unsatisfactory. Consequently, the matter was remanded with directions for the appellate authority to allow the petitioner to adduce additional evidence, specifically a certificate dated 10 August 2024 issued by respondent no.6. The writ petition was disposed of accordingly by way of remand.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Writ Petition Dismissed for Challenging ITC Reversal Under Sections 16 and 74; Use Appellate Remedies
Case-Laws
GST
The HC dismissed the writ petition challenging the reversal of Input Tax Credit (ITC) on grounds of irregular availing from suppliers with cancelled registrations, noting the petitioner conflated provisions of Section 16 with Section 74 of the Act. Section 16 governs eligibility of ITC, while Section 74 addresses proceedings in cases of fraud or willful misstatement. The court emphasized the multi-tiered statutory adjudicatory framework, including appeals under Section 107 and before the Appellate Tribunal, which are competent to examine factual disputes. Given the factual nature of the controversy and the availability of efficacious statutory remedies, the HC declined to interfere via writ jurisdiction. The petition was dismissed without costs, permitting the petitioner to pursue relief through the prescribed appellate mechanisms.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Writ Petition Dismissed for Fraudulent ITC Claim Using Fictitious Invoices Under GST Section Rules
Case-Laws
GST
The HC dismissed the writ petition challenging the denial of Input Tax Credit (ITC) where the petitioner was found to have availed inadmissible credit based on fictitious invoices issued by non-existent suppliers. The Court held that no Show Cause Notice or personal hearing violated natural justice principles, but the writ petition was not maintainable due to the fraudulent nature of the ITC claim, aligning with precedent restricting writ relief in such cases to protect the exchequer and GST regime. The limitation argument was rejected as the impugned order was validly passed within the prescribed period. The petitioner was granted leave to file an appeal before the Appellate Authority within one month, subject to the required pre-deposit.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Restriction on ITC Transfer Post-Merger Under Section 18(3) CGST Act Not Supported by Law
Case-Laws
GST
The HC held that the restriction imposed by the Respondents on transferring un-utilized ITC post-merger/amalgamation under Section 18(3) CGST Act, 2017, based on differing States/UTs of transferor and transferee, is not supported by the statutory scheme. The Court clarified that the CGST Act prescribes specific timelines for ITC claims and permits transfer of ITC to a new entity arising from amalgamation or merger without imposing a same-State requirement. Legislative intent must be ascertained from the statute's language without adding or substituting words. Consequently, the Petitioner, a new entity formed by amalgamation, is entitled to the transfer of ITC from the transferor company despite differing States. The petition was allowed, directing the Respondents to enable ITC transfer accordingly.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Writ Petition Dismissed; Appeal Allowed with 25% Tax Deposit Under Relevant Tax Rules
Case-Laws
GST
The HC dismissed the writ petition challenging the attachment order and bank attachment notice, holding that the petitioner had an alternative efficacious remedy by way of appeal against the assessment order before the appellate authority. The Court declined to entertain the writ petition, emphasizing the availability of the statutory appellate remedy. The petitioner was granted liberty to file the appeal within four weeks from receipt of the order, subject to depositing 25% of the disputed tax (comprising 15% in addition to the statutory 10% deposit). The appellate authority was directed to admit the appeal without insisting on limitation and to adjudicate the matter on merits expeditiously and in accordance with law upon compliance with the deposit condition.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST exemption granted for NSQF-aligned training under SI No. 69, excluding optional value-added services
Case-Laws
GST
The AAR held that the applicant's training services on repair and maintenance of handheld electronic devices, accredited under an MoU with TSSC and aligned with an NCVET-approved NSQF qualification package, qualify for GST exemption under SI No. 69 of Notification No. 12/2017-Central Tax (Rate) effective from 14 November 2024. These services fall under SAC 999294 (Other education and training services n.e.c.) and are distinct from generic commercial coaching. However, optional value-added services such as placement assistance, an entrepreneurship course, and proprietary certification offered independently of the core NSQF-aligned program are not exempt and remain taxable. The exemption strictly applies only to training services linked to an NSQF-aligned qualification with an approved package by NCVET, thereby excluding ancillary services provided for additional fees outside the sanctioned vocational training framework.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =