Goods and Services Tax

Rice Husk Board with PVC Resin Cannot Be Classified Under Chapter 44 of GST Tariff
Case-Laws
GST
The AAR dismissed an application seeking classification of rice husk board (containing rice husk powder, calcium carbonate, recycled waste, processing aids, and PVC resin as a bonding agent) under Chapter 44 of the GST tariff. The authority found the application unmaintainable for several reasons: the submission appeared to be an exact reproduction of a previous ruling (M/s. Papaka Herbs & Spices Private Ltd.), the submitted test report from a NABL-accredited laboratory contained parameters not covered under NABL accreditation, the report lacked reference to BIS standards, and the applicant failed to provide supporting documentation such as brochures, purchase invoices for inputs, or sales invoices.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Goods Delivered Under Fraudulent Orders Still Constitute “Supply” Under Section 7 of CGST Act Despite Non-Payment
Case-Laws
GST
The AAR ruled that goods supplied by the applicant, despite being a victim of fraud without receiving consideration, still constituted a “supply” under GST law. The authority determined that while fraud may vitiate a contract, it does not negate the statutory definition of “supply” under section 7 of the CGST Act. The facts established that goods were physically removed and received at the destination, as confirmed by the FIR. The AAR concluded that the transaction qualified as supply of goods under section 20 of the IGST Act read with sections 12 and 7 of the CGST Act, regardless of the fraudulent nature of the order.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Input Tax Credit Available on Employer's Share of Mandatory Canteen Services Under Factories Act
Case-Laws
GST
The AAR ruled that Input Tax Credit (ITC) is available to the applicant for GST charged on food and beverages provided through mandatory canteen facilities under the Factories Act, 1948, read with Gujarat Factories Rules, 1963. This eligibility applies specifically to canteen services for factory employees where such provision is obligatory under law. However, the ITC is limited strictly to the portion of the cost borne by the applicant company, excluding any contribution made by employees. This ruling creates a specific exception to the general restriction on ITC for food and beverages by recognizing the statutory obligation to provide canteen facilities.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Non-bailable warrants quashed in GST evasion case as accused previously cooperated with investigation and authorities.
Case-Laws
GST
The HC quashed non-bailable warrants issued against the petitioner accused of GST evasion through fake firms. The court held that non-bailable warrants should only be issued when an accused fails to appear after service of summons or bailable warrants. In this case, the petitioner had previously cooperated with the investigation, appeared before authorities, and provided statements. The court converted the non-bailable warrants to bailable warrants, noting that the petitioner showed no likelihood of evading legal process. Applying the principle from Tarsem Lal and Sharif Ahmed precedents, the HC emphasized that courts must consider whether an accused is likely to evade justice or tamper with evidence before issuing non-bailable warrants. The presumption of innocence was also affirmed as a fundamental principle of criminal jurisprudence.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST Amnesty Scheme Under Section 128(A) Offers Relief from Interest and Penalties for Section 73 Notices
Case-Laws
GST
The HC set aside the impugned order and remanded the matter to respondent No.5 for fresh reconsideration in accordance with law. This decision stemmed from the petitioner's intention to avail benefits under the Amnesty Scheme provided in Section 128(A) of the CGST Act, which offers waiver of interest and penalties for notices issued under Section 73. The Court deemed it just and appropriate to allow the petition through remand, issuing specific directions to guide the respondent's reconsideration of the matter in light of the petitioner's eligibility for amnesty benefits concerning interest and penalty waivers.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST Penalties Reversed: Authority Must Compensate Hindu Undivided Family for Wrongful Tax Head Deposit
Case-Laws
GST
The HC issued a writ of mandamus directing NOIDA to compensate the petitioner, head of a Hindu Undivided Family, Rs. 19,22,778/- within 15 days for penalties imposed under the GST Act. NOIDA had acknowledged that the petitioner's GST payment was deposited under the wrong head due to their error, not the petitioner's fault. Following the Supreme Court's principle in Batliboi that compensation should not result in windfall for one party at another's expense, the court determined the petitioner should not suffer penalties for NOIDA's administrative mistake. NOIDA must notify the District Magistrate after payment and retains the right to recover the amount from its erring officers. Petition disposed of.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST Assessment Order Challenged as Non-Speaking: Petitioner Granted Liberty to Appeal Under Section 75(6)
Case-Laws
GST
The HC disposed of the petition challenging a GST assessment order characterized as non-speaking and violative of Section 75(6) of the GST Act. Rather than adjudicating on merits, the Court granted the petitioner liberty to approach the appellate Deputy Commissioner (State Tax) within two weeks, directing the appellate authority to entertain the appeal without reference to limitation periods and dispose of it within three months. The Court ordered status quo to be maintained in the interim. The petitioner was permitted to raise all grounds from the writ petition in the appeal, including violations of natural justice principles and the non-speaking nature of the impugned order.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Revenue Department Must Grant Personal Hearing Before Recovery of Excess ITC Under Section 75(4) of CGST Act
Case-Laws
GST
The HC quashed and set aside the impugned order-in-original regarding recovery of alleged excess ITC, finding it was passed in violation of principles of natural justice and Section 75(4) of the CGST Act. The respondent authority failed to grant the petitioners a personal hearing before passing an adverse order. The matter was remanded for fresh de novo proceedings, directing the authority to provide the petitioners an opportunity to reconcile Form GSTR 2A with Form GSTR 3B for the period under consideration. The court ordered completion of this exercise within 12 weeks from receipt of the order.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Writ Appeal Partly Allowed: Court Sets Aside Automatic Restoration Clause, Grants Time for Reply with Jurisdictional Defenses
Case-Laws
GST
The HC partly allowed the writ appeal against an impugned order that exceeded the amount specified in the Show Cause Notice (SCN). While the court acknowledged potential violations of natural justice principles regarding jurisdiction and limitation, it determined these issues required factual examination by the respondent authority. The HC set aside the Single Judge's observation regarding automatic restoration of the order if no reply was filed within three weeks. Instead, the appellant was granted four weeks from judgment receipt to submit their reply, with explicit permission to raise both limitation and jurisdictional defenses before the respondent authority.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Limitation Period for Returns After GST Best Judgment Assessment Is Directory, Not Mandatory Under Section 62(2)
Case-Laws
GST
The HC ruled that the 60-day limitation period under Section 62(2) of the GST Act for filing returns after a best judgment assessment is directory rather than mandatory. If an assessee fails to file returns within this period due to reasons beyond their control, authorities may condone the delay upon application with sufficient justification. The taxpayer would then be permitted to file returns after paying applicable interest, penalties, and charges. The Court held that the right to file returns cannot be categorically denied based solely on non-compliance with the 60-day timeframe. The petitioner was directed to file a delay condonation application within 15 days.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST Taxpayer Granted Two Weeks to File Rectification Application Under Section 161 of TN GST Act
Case-Laws
GST
The HC disposed of the writ petitions, granting the petitioner liberty to file a rectification application under Section 161 of the Tamil Nadu Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 before the second respondent within two weeks of receiving the order. The Court determined that statutory remedy was available to the petitioner through the rectification process. If such application is filed within the stipulated timeframe, the second respondent must entertain and dispose of the matter according to law within one month, after providing the petitioner an opportunity for hearing.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Assessment Order Without Officer's Signature and DIN Ruled Invalid Under GST Act
Case-Laws
GST
The HC invalidated a GST assessment order in Form GST DRC-07 due to two fatal defects: absence of the assessing officer's signature and missing Document Identification Number (DIN). Following precedents established in A.V. Bhanoji Row and M/s. SRK Enterprises, the Court affirmed that an officer's signature cannot be dispensed with, and Sections 160 and 169 of CGST Act, 2017 cannot rectify such deficiency. Regarding the DIN requirement, the Court relied on the Supreme Court's ruling in Pradeep Goyal, which held that orders without DIN numbers are non-est and invalid, consistent with CBIC circulars. Consequently, the impugned assessment order was set aside and the petition disposed of.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Advisory for Biometric-Based Aadhaar Authentication and Document Verification for GST Registration Applicants of Assam
GST
Dated:- 2-4-2025

This is to inform taxpayers about recent developments concerning the application process for GST registration. It is advised to keep the following key points in mind during the registration process.
1. Rule 8 of the CGST Rules, 2017 has been amended to provide that an applicant can be identified on the common portal, based on data analysis and risk parameters for Biometric-based Aadhaar Authentication and taking a photograph of the applicant along with the verification of the original copy of the documents uploaded with the application.
2. The above-said functionality has been devel

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

n as per the existing process.
5. However, if the applicant receives the link as mentioned in point 3(b), she/he will be required to book the appointment to visit the designated GSK, using the link provided in the e-mail.
6. The feature of booking an appointment to visit a designated GSK is being enabled for the applicants of Assam and the applicants can book slots from 1st April, 2025..
7. After booking the appointment, the applicant gets the confirmation of appointment through e-mail (the appointment confirmation e-mail), she/he will be able to visit the designated GSK as per the chosen schedule.
8. At the time of the visit of GSK, the applicant is required to carry the following details/documents
(a)  a copy (hard/soft) o

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST Orders Uploaded Without Proper Service Violate Natural Justice, Court Remands Case Under Section 73
Case-Laws
GST
The HC set aside orders passed under section 73 of the Act that were merely uploaded to the GST Portal without proper service to the petitioner. The court found these ex parte orders violated principles of natural justice as the petitioner had no opportunity to view the notices on the portal, file replies, or appear for personal hearings. While noting that no deposit conditions could be imposed for orders violating natural justice, the court acknowledged the petitioner's voluntary offer to deposit 25% of the disputed tax. The matters were remanded to the respondent for fresh consideration subject to fulfillment of conditions imposed.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST Time Extension During COVID-19: Court Defers Ruling on Section 168A Constitutionality Pending Supreme Court Decision
Case-Laws
GST
HC refrained from ruling on the constitutionality of Section 168A of the CGST Act and related notifications extending compliance timelines under Section 73(10) during COVID-19. The court noted that the Supreme Court had issued notice in SLP-4240-2025 (HCC-SEW-MEIL-AAG JV v. Assistant Commissioner of State Tax) on similar issues. The HC directed that all connected cases would be governed by the Supreme Court's eventual judgment. The interim orders previously granted would continue to operate until final adjudication by the SC. The SLP was disposed of accordingly, with the court deferring to the apex court's pending determination on the validity of the pandemic-related tax compliance extensions.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Bail denied for mastermind accused of Rs. 53.03 Crore GST fraud through 12 fake firms and fraudulent ITC claims.
Case-Laws
GST
DSC dismissed the bail application of the accused in a GST fraud case involving creation and operation of 12 fake firms for fraudulent Input Tax Credit (ITC) claims. The accused was identified as the mastermind who defrauded the government exchequer of approximately Rs. 53.03 Crores through fake billing without actual supply of goods. The court determined this constituted a grave economic offense affecting public interest, with ongoing investigation. The court found substantial flight risk and potential for evidence tampering if bail were granted, given the accused's central role in the sophisticated tax evasion scheme involving multiple phantom businesses and fraudulent documentation.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST kitty grows 10 pc in March to Rs 1.96 lakh cr, second-highest ever
GST
Dated:- 1-4-2025
PTI
New Delhi, Apr 1 (PTI) Gross GST collection grew 9.9 per cent in March to over Rs 1.96 lakh crore – the second-highest mop-up ever, government data showed on Tuesday.
GST revenue from domestic transactions rose 8.8 per cent to Rs 1.49 lakh crore, while revenue from imported goods was higher 13.56 per cent to Rs 46,919 crore.
The gross collection includes Central GST mop-up of Rs 38,145 crore, State GST collection of Rs 49,891 crore and Integrated GST (IGST) of Rs 95,853 crore. Cess collection during March stood at Rs 12,253 crore.
Total refunds during March rose 41 per cent to Rs 19,615 crore.
After adjusting refunds, net GST

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

nufacturing and consuming states . While states like Maharashtra, Haryana, UP, Rajasthan have shown a growth exceeding 10 per cent, other states like Gujarat, Karnataka, Telengana, AP, Tamil Nadu have been in the range of -1 per cent to 7 per cent, which is very unusual for the month of March. There is a need to understand the reasons for the same by evaluating the sectoral growth and compliance rates in these states,” Mani said.
KPMG in India, Partner and Head, Indirect Tax, Abhishek Jain said, a nearly 10 per cent growth in collections compared to last year reflects economic stability and strong tax compliance by companies.
“With fiscal year-end adjustments and reconciliations underway, we can expect a further surge in month-on-month

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Gross and Net GST revenue collections for the month of Mar, 2025
GST
Dated:- 1-4-2025

The gross and net GST revenue collections for the month of March, 2025.
News – Press release – PIB

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST collection grows 9.9 pc to over Rs 1.96 lakh cr in March
GST
Dated:- 1-4-2025
PTI
New Delhi, Apr 1 (PTI) Gross GST collection in March grew 9.9 per cent to over Rs 1.96 lakh crore, government data showed on Tuesday.
GST revenue from domestic transactions rose 8.8 per cent to Rs 1.49 lakh crore, while revenue from imported goods was higher 13.56 per cent to Rs 46,919 crore.
Total refunds during March rose 41 per cent to Rs 19,615 crore.
After adjusting refunds, net GST reven

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

SCN Issued Two Days Beyond Section 73(2) Deadline Deemed Invalid as Time Limits Are Mandatory, Not Directory
Case-Laws
GST
The HC granted ad-interim relief to the petitioner in a case concerning a show cause notice (SCN) issued two days beyond the statutory deadline under Section 73(2). The court held prima facie that the time limits for issuing SCNs are mandatory, not directory, rendering the late notice legally invalid. Relying on precedent from the AP HC in Cotton Corporation, which established that violation of prescribed time periods makes an SCN otiose, the court determined this was a jurisdictional issue where the proper officer lacked authority to issue the delayed notice. The matter was scheduled for further hearing on April 22, 2025.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Applicant Granted Bail in GST Case on Parity Grounds with Co-accused Under Sections 132(1)(b), 132(1)(c), and 132(1)(i)
Case-Laws
GST
The HC granted bail to the applicant charged under Sections 132(1)(b), 132(1)(c), and 132(1)(i) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, primarily on grounds of parity with co-accused Vikrant Singhal and Sachin Singhal. Without expressing any opinion on the merits, the court allowed the application on identical terms as previously granted to the co-accused. The applicant must furnish requisite bail bonds and surety to the trial court's satisfaction and comply with all conditions imposed by the trial court at the time of acceptance of these instruments.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Bail Granted Under Section 439 CrPC to Young Accused in GST Act Case with 1 Lakh Bond Requirement
Case-Laws
GST
The SC allowed the bail application under Section 439 CrPC for the accused charged under Section 132(1)(c) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The Court granted bail to the applicant upon submission of a personal bond of 1 lakh along with two satisfactory sureties of 50,000 each before the trial court. The bail was granted subject to fulfillment of additional conditions imposed by the Court. The accused, a 21-year-old resident of Hanumangarh, Rajasthan, had his bail application approved with these financial security requirements serving as the primary conditions for release.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Service Tax Recovery Limited to Three Years as Fraud Not Proven Under Section 73(1) of Finance Act, 1994
Case-Laws
GST
HC dismissed the appeal, finding no substantial question of law regarding invocation of the extended five-year limitation period under Section 73(1) of Finance Act, 1994. The court upheld CESTAT's determination that the respondent's actions were based on bona fide belief rather than wilful misstatement or fraud. Though the Commissioner issued a composite show cause notice covering 2004-2009, the court declined to interfere with CESTAT's order, particularly regarding the period after the August 23, 2007 master circular, as no fraudulent intent was established to justify extending the limitation period.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Expired E-way Bill and Wrong Route Direction Lead to Valid Detention of Goods Under GST Rules
Case-Laws
GST
The HC dismissed a petition challenging detention of goods and vehicle due to an expired E-way bill. The Court found that natural justice principles were satisfied as a show-cause notice was issued and hearing opportunity provided to petitioners after the detention order. Authorities had valid jurisdiction as the vehicle was intercepted at Dharsiva heading toward Bilaspur-the opposite direction from the route specified in the original E-way bill-with a subsequent E-way bill generated for Madhya Pradesh. The Court distinguished this case from precedents where traffic blockages or technical portal issues justified E-way bill violations, finding no grounds to interfere with the detention order.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST Assessment Order Set Aside for Lacking Document Identification Number as Required by CBIC Circular
Case-Laws
GST
The HC set aside the GST assessment order that lacked a Document Identification Number (DIN). Following precedent established in Pradeep Goyal v. Union of India (SC) and M/s. Cluster Enterprises v. The Deputy Assistant Commissioner (ST)-2, Kadapa, the court determined that absence of a DIN renders the order non-est and invalid. The judgment relied on CBIC Circular No.128/47/2019-GST dated 23.12.2019, which mandates DIN inclusion for validity of proceedings. The court concluded that since the impugned order uploaded to the portal did not contain a DIN, it could not be sustained and must be set aside. The petition was accordingly disposed of.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =