Taxpayer's GST Deregistration Valid Despite Supplier's Later Registration Cancellation if Taxes Were Paid During Transaction

Taxpayer’s GST Deregistration Valid Despite Supplier’s Later Registration Cancellation if Taxes Were Paid During TransactionCase-LawsGSTHC determined that subsequent or retrospective cancellation of supplier registrations does not invalidate a taxpayer’s

Taxpayer's GST Deregistration Valid Despite Supplier's Later Registration Cancellation if Taxes Were Paid During Transaction
Case-Laws
GST
HC determined that subsequent or retrospective cancellation of supplier registrations does not invalidate a taxpayer's request for voluntary GST deregistration, provided the supplies were obtained from validly registered vendors who had paid applicable taxes at the time of transaction. The petitioner was granted three weeks to submit documentation pr

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Taxpayer Allowed to Transfer GST Demand Payment from DRC-03 to PMT-01 Through New DRC-03A Form Under Rule 142(2B)

Taxpayer Allowed to Transfer GST Demand Payment from DRC-03 to PMT-01 Through New DRC-03A Form Under Rule 142(2B)Case-LawsGSTHC addressed payment procedures for GST demands under rule 142. Petitioner paid demand through Form GST DRC-03 instead of required

Taxpayer Allowed to Transfer GST Demand Payment from DRC-03 to PMT-01 Through New DRC-03A Form Under Rule 142(2B)
Case-Laws
GST
HC addressed payment procedures for GST demands under rule 142. Petitioner paid demand through Form GST DRC-03 instead of required electronic liability register Form GST PMT-01. Following recent amendment via notification 12/24 introducing rule 142(2B), petitioner permitted to file Form GST DRC-03A electronically to transfer payment credit to electronic liabili

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Delay in GST Appeal Filing Condoned After Taxpayer Shows Good Faith Through Partial Payment and Compliance

Delay in GST Appeal Filing Condoned After Taxpayer Shows Good Faith Through Partial Payment and ComplianceCase-LawsGSTHC condoned a 35-day delay in filing GST appeal, emphasizing that procedural delays should not override substantive justice. The petition

Delay in GST Appeal Filing Condoned After Taxpayer Shows Good Faith Through Partial Payment and Compliance
Case-Laws
GST
HC condoned a 35-day delay in filing GST appeal, emphasizing that procedural delays should not override substantive justice. The petitioner had demonstrated compliance by depositing 10% of tax liability and making additional payments toward disputed amount. Court found strict application of GST Act's limitation provisions unwarranted given circumstances. Matter remand

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Vehicle and Goods Detained Under Section 129 Released After No Evidence of Tax Evasion Found in Invoice Verification

Vehicle and Goods Detained Under Section 129 Released After No Evidence of Tax Evasion Found in Invoice VerificationCase-LawsGSTHC found detention of vehicle and goods under Section 129 was improper. Physical verification confirmed correct quantity and we

Vehicle and Goods Detained Under Section 129 Released After No Evidence of Tax Evasion Found in Invoice Verification
Case-Laws
GST
HC found detention of vehicle and goods under Section 129 was improper. Physical verification confirmed correct quantity and weight of goods against three invoices, with no discrepancy in broad product classifications. Inspecting authority exceeded scope by scrutinizing detailed specifications (pipe size, shutter, TMT Bar dimensions) not required in invoices

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Government Directed to Process GST Refund Claim for Public Contract Work Following Similar Precedents in Infrastructure Projects

Government Directed to Process GST Refund Claim for Public Contract Work Following Similar Precedents in Infrastructure ProjectsCase-LawsGSTHC directed respondent authorities to immediately process petitioner’s GST refund claim following contract executio

Government Directed to Process GST Refund Claim for Public Contract Work Following Similar Precedents in Infrastructure Projects
Case-Laws
GST
HC directed respondent authorities to immediately process petitioner's GST refund claim following contract execution. The authorities must verify facts and assess petitioner's entitlement, considering precedents where government departments including PWD, PMGSY, NHAI, Railways, and CPWD had refunded GST in similar cases. The court's directive emp

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Section 107: Three-Day Appeal Delay Condoned After Managing Director's Travel Justification Deemed Reasonable Cause

Section 107: Three-Day Appeal Delay Condoned After Managing Director’s Travel Justification Deemed Reasonable CauseCase-LawsGSTHC allowed petition challenging appellate order under Section 107 of 2017 Act, finding that Appellate Authority failed to judici

Section 107: Three-Day Appeal Delay Condoned After Managing Director's Travel Justification Deemed Reasonable Cause
Case-Laws
GST
HC allowed petition challenging appellate order under Section 107 of 2017 Act, finding that Appellate Authority failed to judiciously exercise discretionary power regarding delay condonation. Petitioner demonstrated sufficient cause for 3-day delay in filing appeal, citing Managing Director's travel. The delay fell within condonable period under Section 107(4

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Assessment Orders Without Document Identification Number Are Invalid and Cannot Be Enforced Under GST Rules

Assessment Orders Without Document Identification Number Are Invalid and Cannot Be Enforced Under GST RulesCase-LawsGSTHC ruled that assessment order lacking Document Identification Number (DIN) is invalid and non-est, following Supreme Court precedent in

Assessment Orders Without Document Identification Number Are Invalid and Cannot Be Enforced Under GST Rules
Case-Laws
GST
HC ruled that assessment order lacking Document Identification Number (DIN) is invalid and non-est, following Supreme Court precedent in Pradeep Goyal case. The court relied on CBIC circular No.128/47/2019-GST and previous Division Bench ruling which established that absence of DIN number compromises proceeding validity. Assessment order uploaded to portal without DI

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Service Tax Penalties Under CGST Act Quashed As Services Were Exempt During Pre-GST Period Under Finance Act

Service Tax Penalties Under CGST Act Quashed As Services Were Exempt During Pre-GST Period Under Finance ActCase-LawsGSTHC allowed petition challenging service tax penalties under CGST Act. Penalties pertained to period before CGST implementation when ser

Service Tax Penalties Under CGST Act Quashed As Services Were Exempt During Pre-GST Period Under Finance Act
Case-Laws
GST
HC allowed petition challenging service tax penalties under CGST Act. Penalties pertained to period before CGST implementation when services were exempt under Finance Act 1994. Court relied on precedent from Kanak Automobiles case where tax amount was Rs. 86 lakh compared to present case's Rs. 6,33,879. Distinguishing quantum while following ratio from SC judgment,

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Stock Discrepancies During GST Survey Cannot Trigger Section 130 Penalty Without Following Sections 73/74 Assessment Process

Stock Discrepancies During GST Survey Cannot Trigger Section 130 Penalty Without Following Sections 73/74 Assessment ProcessCase-LawsGSTHC quashed orders imposing tax and penalty under section 130 of GST Act arising from stock discrepancies discovered dur

Stock Discrepancies During GST Survey Cannot Trigger Section 130 Penalty Without Following Sections 73/74 Assessment Process
Case-Laws
GST
HC quashed orders imposing tax and penalty under section 130 of GST Act arising from stock discrepancies discovered during business premises survey. Following established precedents, the Court held that mere stock discrepancies identified during survey warrant proceedings under sections 73/74 rather than section 130 of GST Act. The authority's direct

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Stock Discrepancies Found During GST Survey Must Follow Assessment Under Section 73/74, Not Confiscation Under Section 130

Stock Discrepancies Found During GST Survey Must Follow Assessment Under Section 73/74, Not Confiscation Under Section 130Case-LawsGSTDuring a factory premises survey, discrepancies in raw material and semi-finished product inventory led to confiscation p

Stock Discrepancies Found During GST Survey Must Follow Assessment Under Section 73/74, Not Confiscation Under Section 130
Case-Laws
GST
During a factory premises survey, discrepancies in raw material and semi-finished product inventory led to confiscation proceedings under s.130 read with s.122 of the GST Act. The HC ruled that when stock discrepancies are discovered during a survey of a registered dealer, authorities must initiate proceedings under s.73/74 of the GST Act rather than s

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Commission Agents Need GST Registration Only When Serving Taxable Principals and Making Taxable Supplies Under Section 24(vii)

Commission Agents Need GST Registration Only When Serving Taxable Principals and Making Taxable Supplies Under Section 24(vii)CircularsGSTCBIC clarified mandatory GST registration requirements for commission agents under Section 24(vii) of CGST Act. Commi

Commission Agents Need GST Registration Only When Serving Taxable Principals and Making Taxable Supplies Under Section 24(vii)
Circulars
GST
CBIC clarified mandatory GST registration requirements for commission agents under Section 24(vii) of CGST Act. Commission agents must register only when serving taxable principals and making taxable supplies. Agents representing agriculturists are exempt from mandatory registration since agriculturists supplying cultivation produce are not taxable

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Mentioning SAP Number Instead of Tax Invoice in E-way Bill Deemed Human Error, No Penalty Under Section 129

Mentioning SAP Number Instead of Tax Invoice in E-way Bill Deemed Human Error, No Penalty Under Section 129Case-LawsGSTHC held that mentioning SAP document number instead of tax invoice number in e-way bill during transport from Mathura to Mirzapur was a

Mentioning SAP Number Instead of Tax Invoice in E-way Bill Deemed Human Error, No Penalty Under Section 129
Case-Laws
GST
HC held that mentioning SAP document number instead of tax invoice number in e-way bill during transport from Mathura to Mirzapur was a genuine human error. Physical verification revealed no discrepancies in quality, quantity, or goods description between tax invoice and actual shipment. Authorities failed to establish any intention of tax evasion, which is essential

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Holographic Excise Stickers Classified as Goods Under GST Section 2(52), Not Services; Refund Approved for RCM Payments

Holographic Excise Stickers Classified as Goods Under GST Section 2(52), Not Services; Refund Approved for RCM PaymentsCase-LawsGSTHC determined that holographic stickers supplied by the Prohibition and Excise Department constitute “goods” under Section 2

Holographic Excise Stickers Classified as Goods Under GST Section 2(52), Not Services; Refund Approved for RCM Payments
Case-Laws
GST
HC determined that holographic stickers supplied by the Prohibition and Excise Department constitute “goods” under Section 2(52) of GST laws, not services. The supply cannot be classified as a “composite supply” with excise licensing. The petitioner's previous RCM tax payments were made erroneously, as the stickers are not taxable supplies under Section 2

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Tax Assessment Order Quashed: Officer Failed to Follow Section 74 Guidelines and Determine Liability Under GST Act

Tax Assessment Order Quashed: Officer Failed to Follow Section 74 Guidelines and Determine Liability Under GST ActCase-LawsGSTHC quashed assessment order due to procedural non-compliance under Section 74 of TN GST Act, 2017. AO failed to determine tax lia

Tax Assessment Order Quashed: Officer Failed to Follow Section 74 Guidelines and Determine Liability Under GST Act
Case-Laws
GST
HC quashed assessment order due to procedural non-compliance under Section 74 of TN GST Act, 2017. AO failed to determine tax liability and disregarded Commissioner's circular guidelines, rendering order arbitrary. Court found fundamental procedural lapses in assessment methodology, violating statutory requirements for tax determination. Matter remanded to ass

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Unsigned GST Assessment Order Invalid: Signature Requirement Mandatory Under CGST Act Sections 160 & 169

Unsigned GST Assessment Order Invalid: Signature Requirement Mandatory Under CGST Act Sections 160 & 169Case-LawsGSTHC set aside GST assessment order due to absence of assessing officer’s signature, holding it as a fatal procedural defect. The court d

Unsigned GST Assessment Order Invalid: Signature Requirement Mandatory Under CGST Act Sections 160 & 169
Case-Laws
GST
HC set aside GST assessment order due to absence of assessing officer's signature, holding it as a fatal procedural defect. The court determined that signature requirement cannot be dispensed with and such defect cannot be rectified under Sections 160 & 169 of CGST Act, 2017. While invalidating the assessment order in Form GST DRC-07, HC granted liberty to tax autho

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Tax Officials Cannot Penalize Missing State E-way Bill During Feb-Mar 2018 Under Section 129(3) UPGST Act

Tax Officials Cannot Penalize Missing State E-way Bill During Feb-Mar 2018 Under Section 129(3) UPGST ActCase-LawsGSTHC quashed proceedings initiated under Section 129(3) of UPGST Act 2017 regarding goods intercepted without state E-way bill. While tax in

Tax Officials Cannot Penalize Missing State E-way Bill During Feb-Mar 2018 Under Section 129(3) UPGST Act
Case-Laws
GST
HC quashed proceedings initiated under Section 129(3) of UPGST Act 2017 regarding goods intercepted without state E-way bill. While tax invoice, Central E-way bill and builty accompanied the goods, state E-way bill was absent. Following precedents in similar cases, HC held that during 01.02.2018 to 31.03.2018, E-way bill requirement under UPGST Act was not enforceable.

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Absence of E-Tax Invoice Due to GST Portal Glitch Cannot Justify Detention or Penalties When Physical Documents Exist

Absence of E-Tax Invoice Due to GST Portal Glitch Cannot Justify Detention or Penalties When Physical Documents ExistCase-LawsGSTHC determined that detention of goods and penalties imposed for missing e-tax invoice were unjustified. While physical tax inv

Absence of E-Tax Invoice Due to GST Portal Glitch Cannot Justify Detention or Penalties When Physical Documents Exist
Case-Laws
GST
HC determined that detention of goods and penalties imposed for missing e-tax invoice were unjustified. While physical tax invoice, e-way bill, and bilty accompanied the goods with accurate descriptions and quantities, the e-tax invoice was absent due to technical issues with GST portal. The authorities failed to establish any intent to evade tax payments.

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST Registration Cancellation Order Quashed: Lack of Mandatory Reasoning Violates Administrative Law and Constitutional Rights

GST Registration Cancellation Order Quashed: Lack of Mandatory Reasoning Violates Administrative Law and Constitutional RightsCase-LawsGSTHC quashed the GST registration cancellation order dated 06.04.2021 issued by Asst Commissioner. The order lacked man

GST Registration Cancellation Order Quashed: Lack of Mandatory Reasoning Violates Administrative Law and Constitutional Rights
Case-Laws
GST
HC quashed the GST registration cancellation order dated 06.04.2021 issued by Asst Commissioner. The order lacked mandatory reasoning for cancellation, violating fundamental principles of administrative law and Art 14 of Constitution. Though petitioner's appeal was dismissed for limitation under s.107(4) UPGST Act, doctrine of merger was found inap

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Electronic Service of Notices Under Central Excise Act Valid Through CGST Act Sections 142(8)(a) and 169(1)(c)

Electronic Service of Notices Under Central Excise Act Valid Through CGST Act Sections 142(8)(a) and 169(1)(c)Case-LawsGSTHC held that electronic service of notices under Central Excise Act 1944 is permissible through application of CGST Act provisions. R

Electronic Service of Notices Under Central Excise Act Valid Through CGST Act Sections 142(8)(a) and 169(1)(c)
Case-Laws
GST
HC held that electronic service of notices under Central Excise Act 1944 is permissible through application of CGST Act provisions. Reading Sections 142(8)(a) and 169(1)(c) of CGST Act together enables electronic service modes for existing laws including 1944 Act, despite Section 37C being silent on email service. Court rejected petitioner's argument against elect

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Officer's CGST Act Arrest Invalidated After Driver Signs Memo Instead of Family Member, Violating D.K. Basu Guidelines

Officer’s CGST Act Arrest Invalidated After Driver Signs Memo Instead of Family Member, Violating D.K. Basu GuidelinesCase-LawsGSTHC invalidated an arrest under CGST Act 2017 due to procedural violations. While proper documentation including arrest memo,

Officer's CGST Act Arrest Invalidated After Driver Signs Memo Instead of Family Member, Violating D.K. Basu Guidelines
Case-Laws
GST
HC invalidated an arrest under CGST Act 2017 due to procedural violations. While proper documentation including arrest memo, medical records and grounds for arrest were maintained, the arrest memo was improperly attested by a driver rather than a family member or local resident as required by official instructions and D.K. Basu guidelines. The arresting of

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST Registration Cancelled Under Section 29(2)(e) After Business Failed to Prove Actual Premises Occupancy

GST Registration Cancelled Under Section 29(2)(e) After Business Failed to Prove Actual Premises OccupancyCase-LawsGSTHC upheld cancellation of petitioner’s registration under Section 29(2)(e) due to fraudulent misrepresentation of business premises. Desp

GST Registration Cancelled Under Section 29(2)(e) After Business Failed to Prove Actual Premises Occupancy
Case-Laws
GST
HC upheld cancellation of petitioner's registration under Section 29(2)(e) due to fraudulent misrepresentation of business premises. Despite presenting electricity bills and leave/license agreement, petitioner failed to substantiate actual occupancy through proof of license fee payments or utility charges. Petitioner's inaction in responding to show cause notice, non-

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Input Tax Credit Order Under Section 16(4) CGST Act Set Aside Due To Procedural Non-Compliance And Lack Of Fair Hearing

Input Tax Credit Order Under Section 16(4) CGST Act Set Aside Due To Procedural Non-Compliance And Lack Of Fair HearingCase-LawsGSTHC set aside respondent’s order concerning input tax credit under Section 16(4) of CGST Act, 2017. The matter was remanded b

Input Tax Credit Order Under Section 16(4) CGST Act Set Aside Due To Procedural Non-Compliance And Lack Of Fair Hearing
Case-Laws
GST
HC set aside respondent's order concerning input tax credit under Section 16(4) of CGST Act, 2017. The matter was remanded back to respondent No.7 for fresh consideration in accordance with amended Section 16 provisions. The authority must provide petitioner opportunity for hearing and issue new determination within two months from certified order copy pr

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST Appeal Delay of 142 Days Condoned After Late Physical Service of Notice Despite Portal Upload

GST Appeal Delay of 142 Days Condoned After Late Physical Service of Notice Despite Portal UploadCase-LawsGSTHC condoned 142-day delay in filing GST appeal where appellant demonstrated reasonable cause due to belated service of demand notice. While notice

GST Appeal Delay of 142 Days Condoned After Late Physical Service of Notice Despite Portal Upload
Case-Laws
GST
HC condoned 142-day delay in filing GST appeal where appellant demonstrated reasonable cause due to belated service of demand notice. While notice was uploaded on GST portal, physical copy was only served on 16.04.2024. Court determined delayed physical service constituted sufficient grounds for condonation, setting aside appellate authority's original order rejecting appeal.

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Taxpayers Can Claim GST Input Tax Credit for 2017-21 if GSTR-3B Filed by November 2021 Under Section 16(5)

Taxpayers Can Claim GST Input Tax Credit for 2017-21 if GSTR-3B Filed by November 2021 Under Section 16(5)Case-LawsGSTHC allowed petition regarding Input Tax Credit (ITC) claims under GST regime. Following precedent in Sri Ganapathi Pandi Industries case,

Taxpayers Can Claim GST Input Tax Credit for 2017-21 if GSTR-3B Filed by November 2021 Under Section 16(5)
Case-Laws
GST
HC allowed petition regarding Input Tax Credit (ITC) claims under GST regime. Following precedent in Sri Ganapathi Pandi Industries case, court held that retrospective amendment to Section 16 of CGST Act by insertion of sub-section (5) enables taxpayers to claim ITC for FYs 2017-18 to 2020-21 if GSTR-3B returns were filed by November 30, 2021. Department's order dated

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Technical Error in Auto-Populated Shipping Address on E-Way Bill Cannot Justify GST Seizure or Penalty

Technical Error in Auto-Populated Shipping Address on E-Way Bill Cannot Justify GST Seizure or PenaltyCase-LawsGSTHC held that a technical error in shipping address on an auto-populated e-way bill cannot justify seizure or penalty under GST law. The e-way

Technical Error in Auto-Populated Shipping Address on E-Way Bill Cannot Justify GST Seizure or Penalty
Case-Laws
GST
HC held that a technical error in shipping address on an auto-populated e-way bill cannot justify seizure or penalty under GST law. The e-way bill, valid from 14.12.2022 to 16.12.2022, was not cancelled within its validity period, indicating the transaction's legitimacy. The primary purpose of e-way bills is to track goods movement and ensure proper tax assessment. Since

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =