Goods and Services Tax

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,

= = = = = = = =

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 accordanc

= = = = = = = =

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 b

= = = = = = = =

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 impug

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

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 thir

= = = = = = = =

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 su

= = = = = = = =

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 ante

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

artment.
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 “challen

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

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 directi

= = = = = = = =

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 c

= = = = = = = =

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 n

= = = = = = = =

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 arisi

= = = = = = = =

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 t

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

102 Government-Approved Education Courses Classified Under SAC 999294 Eligible for GST Exemption per Notification 12/2017-CT
Case-Laws
GST
The AAR held that 102 courses conducted by the applicant, approved by the Government of Kerala and forming part of the FYUGP curriculum under NEP 2020, are appropriately classified under SAC 999294 as “Other education and training services not elsewhere classified” and are eligible for GST exemption under Entry 66 of Notification 12/2017-CT (Rate). C

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Fresh Water Tank and Effluent Pond Classified as Plant and Machinery for ITC under Section 17(5) CGST Act
Case-Laws
GST
The AAR ruled that the fresh water storage tank and effluent guard pond constructed by the applicant qualify as “plant and machinery” under the CGST Act, as they are integral to the core manufacturing process and not merely civil structures or buildings. Despite being constructed through civil works, these assets function as essential production apparatus, supporting u

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Rooftop Solar Plant Qualifies as Capital Goods for ITC Under Section 16(1) of CGST Act, 2017
Case-Laws
GST
The AAR held that the rooftop solar power plant installed at the commercial premises qualifies as “plant and machinery” under the Explanation to Section 17(6) of the CGST Act, 2017, as it is fixed to earth by structural support. Consequently, the plant constitutes capital goods eligible for input tax credit (ITC) under Section 16(1), not barred by Sections 17(5)(c) or 17(5)(d). Sin

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =