Goods and Services Tax

Lottery distributors not liable to pay service tax to Centre: SC
GST
Dated:- 11-2-2025
PTI
New Delhi, Feb 11 (PTI) Lottery distributors are not liable to pay service tax to the Union government, the Supreme Court held on Tuesday while dismissing an appeal of the Centre on the issue.
A bench comprising Justices BV Nagarathna and NK Singh did not agree to the appeal of the Centre against the Sikkim High Court judgement.
“Since there is no agency in the relationship, the respondents (lottery distributors) were not liable to pay service tax. However, the respondents will continue to pay the gambling tax levied by the state under Entry 62, List II of the Constitution,” Justice Nagarathna said while pronouncing the verdict.

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Tax Assessment Order Quashed as Notice Lacked Document Identification Number Required Under CBIC Circular 128/47/2019-GST
Case-Laws
GST
HC set aside GST assessment proceedings due to absence of Document Identification Number (DIN). Following established precedents and CBIC Circular No.128/47/2019-GST mandating DIN, the court held that non-inclusion of DIN invalidates tax proceedings. While quashing the impugned order dated 17-10-2024, HC granted liberty to tax authorities to initiate fr

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Tax Authorities Must Initiate Recovery Within One Year of ITC Block Under Rule 86A to Prevent Automatic Unblocking
Case-Laws
GST
HC affirmed that blocking under Rule 86A of Orissa GST Rules serves as revenue security by preventing utilization of future ITC through negative balance insertion in electronic credit ledger. The court emphasized the necessity for tax authorities to initiate recovery proceedings within the one-year blocking period, as automatic unblocking would otherwise allow

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Tax Authority Must Allow Taxpayer Final Hearing Before Assessment After 25% Payment Commitment Under GST Law
Case-Laws
GST
Petitioner contested order regarding deficient monthly returns and lack of supporting documentation. Following precedent in K. Balakrishnan case, HC set aside the impugned order. Petitioner demonstrated willingness to pay 25% of disputed tax amount and requested final opportunity for presenting objections before adjudicating authority. Government Pleader raised no s

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST Officers' Cash Seizure Ruled Illegal; Income Tax Transfer Under Section 132A Cannot Validate Unauthorized Action
Case-Laws
GST
HC determined the initial cash seizure by state GST officers was unlawful, lacking statutory authority under CGST/SGST Act. The subsequent transfer of seized funds to Income Tax Department under Section 132A of IT Act could not legitimize the original illegal seizure. The court emphasized constitutional principles under Articles 265 and 300A protecting again

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Taxpayers eligible for interest and penalty waiver under Section 128A despite departmental appeals on tax demands
Circulars
GST
CBIC clarifies procedure for departmental appeals regarding interest/penalty under Section 128A of CGST Act. Where taxpayers have fully paid tax demands under Section 73 for FY 2017-20, they remain eligible for interest/penalty waiver even if department has filed or plans to file appeal concerning incorrect interest calculations or penalty impositions. Proper o

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST Appeals Must Be Filed Within 4 Months: No Power to Condone Delay Beyond Section 107 Limitation Period
Case-Laws
GST
HC held that appellate authority lacks inherent power to condone delay beyond statutory limits under CGST Act Section 107. Appeals must be filed within three months of order communication, with discretionary one-month extension for sufficient cause under Section 107(4). Where legislation creates special limitation regime with terminal date, general provisions of Limita

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Voluntary GST Payment Through Form DRC-03 Accepted as Valid Pre-Deposit for Appeal Against Original Order
Case-Laws
GST
HC ruled that voluntary payment made through Form GST DRC-03 constitutes valid pre-deposit for filing appeal against order-in-original, even though Form GST DRC-03A was introduced later. Following Circular No.224/18/2024-GST's clarification that DRC-03 payments shall be considered equivalent to DRC-03A pre-deposits, the Court set aside the rejection order dated 26.07.2

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Tax Department's 24-Hour Notice and 48-Hour Reply Window Violates Natural Justice, Order Set Aside for Fresh Hearing
Case-Laws
GST
HC held that principles of natural justice were violated when tax authorities provided insufficient time to petitioner for filing reply and personal hearing. The impugned order was deemed arbitrary and illegal as authorities gave only 24 hours notice for hearing and 48 hours for manual reply submission, followed by order passage within 24 hours thereafter. C

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Show Cause Notice Under GST Section 73(2) Invalidated Due To Two-Day Delay In Mandatory Timeline
Case-Laws
GST
HC ruled on the validity of a show cause notice (SCN) under GST law regarding time limitations. The Court examined Section 73(2) and 75 of GST Act, determining that statutory timelines for issuing SCNs are mandatory, not directory. Drawing parallels with precedent from arbitration law, HC emphasized taxpayer protections including right to notice, personal hearing, and adequate

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Tax Determination Order Quashed: Authority Failed to Issue Proper Show Cause Notice Under Section 73(1) of AGST Act
Case-Laws
GST
HC invalidated tax determination order due to procedural non-compliance with AGST Act 2017. Authority failed to issue proper Show Cause Notice (SCN) under Section 73(1), instead providing only a summary notice and tax determination attachment. Court emphasized that SCN summary cannot substitute statutorily mandated full notice. Proper officer must issue compl

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST Orders Quashed After Tax Department Failed to Serve Physical Notices and Denied Hearing Opportunity to Assessee
Case-Laws
GST
HC invalidated ex parte orders issued by tax authorities due to violation of natural justice principles. The respondent-Department failed to properly serve notices through physical means, only posting them on GST Portal's 'View of additional notices and orders' section, which petitioner was unaware of. The Court found that passing orders without providing opp

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Bank Account Freeze Orders Partially Lifted: HDFC Account Fully Released, SBI Account Unfrozen Up To Rs. 70 Lacs
Case-Laws
GST
HC partially lifted provisional attachment orders on bank accounts in tax liability dispute. Account in HDFC Bank Limited was completely unfrozen, while State Bank of India account received partial relief with debit restrictions lifted up to Rs. 70 Lacs. The freeze order remains effective for amounts exceeding Rs. 70 Lacs in the SBI account. Court balanced taxpa

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Assessee's Right to GST Pre-Deposit Refund Cannot Be Time-Barred Under Section 54; 'May' Interpreted as Directory
Case-Laws
GST
HC ruled that rejection of GST pre-deposit refund application on grounds of time bar under Section 54 is invalid. The court interpreted the word “may” in Section 54 as directory rather than mandatory, following SC precedent. The judgment emphasized that statutory pre-deposit refund is a vested right after successful appeal, and cannot be forfeited using Section

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Input Tax Credit Claims Must Consider GSTR-9 Annual Returns, Not Just GSTR-3B and GSTR-2A Discrepancies Under Section 44
Case-Laws
GST
HC held that adjudicating authority must consider GSTR-9 annual returns when evaluating Input Tax Credit (ITC) claims, rather than solely relying on discrepancies between GSTR-3B and GSTR-2A returns. The term “reconciliation” in Section 44 implies potential rectification of errors in GSTR-3B through annual returns. Court emphasized that dismissing GSTR-9

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST Return Rectification Petition Rejected As Taxpayer Failed To Exhaust Statutory Remedies Under Section 107
Case-Laws
GST
HC dismissed the writ petition challenging GST return rectification and liability waiver, citing availability of statutory remedy under Section 107 CGST Act. The court noted petitioner failed to respond to show cause notice dated 27-12-2023, DRC-01A, and jurisdictional Range officer's communications. Following SC precedent in Assistant Commissioner of State Tax cas

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Delay in Tax Appeal Not Fatal: Authority Must Consider Condonation Application Before Rejection Under Notification 53/2023
Case-Laws
GST
HC allowed the writ petition, quashing the appellate order that rejected an appeal solely on grounds of delay. The court emphasized that limitation provisions warrant liberal interpretation where genuine hardships exist. Despite petitioner's unawareness of the earlier appeal's rejection leading to a missed deadline under Notification No. 53/2023, the d

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Supply of Permanently Installed Machinery on Hire Basis Classified as Leasing Services Under GST at 18%
Case-Laws
GST
The AAR ruled on classification of fitted assets supply services on hire basis. The authority determined that the applicant's services constitute leasing/rental services rather than goods leasing, as permanently installed machinery loses its movable property nature under GST. The services involve restricted supply up to tap off points without responsibility for input pow

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Manpower Services to Government Project Through Intermediary Not Exempt Under GST Notification 12/2017
Case-Laws
GST
AAR ruled on GST exemption for manpower services provided by the applicant to Webel Technology Limited (WTL) for a government project. While the services qualify as “pure services” under N/N. 12/2017-Central Tax (Rate), they do not meet exemption criteria since they are provided to WTL, not directly to Public Health Engineering Department (PHED) or any government entity.

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST Fraud: Arrest Declared Illegal Due to Premature Action and Procedural Violations Under Section 132
Case-Laws
GST
The HC found the arrest illegal due to procedural irregularities in a GST fraud investigation. The accused, facing charges under s.132 of GST Act for wrongful ITC utilization, was arrested hastily on December 22, 2024, at 7:55 am, despite a pending summons for December 30, 2024. The arrest memo, signed by Asst. Commissioner of State Tax, showed authorization obtained the

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Advisory for Biometric-Based Aadhaar Authentication and Document Verification for GST Registration Applicants of Maharashtra and Lakshadweep
GST
Dated:- 8-2-2025

Dear Taxpayers,
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-

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

, she/he can proceed with the application 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 now available for the applicants of Maharashtra and Lakshadweep.
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) of the

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Input Tax Credit Refund Restrictions Under Notification 9/2022 Cannot Apply to Credits Accrued Before July 2022
Case-Laws
GST
HC held that refund restrictions on input tax credit introduced by Notification No. 9/2022 (effective 18.07.2022) cannot be applied retrospectively. The Court invalidated Circular No. 181/13/2022-GST to the extent it made restrictions applicable to all refund applications filed after 18.07.2022, regardless of when input tax credit accrued. The Court emphasized th

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Manpower Services for Jal Jeevan Mission's Data Entry and Engineering Support Qualify as GST-Exempt Pure Services
Case-Laws
GST
AAR ruled that manpower services supplied to Public Health Engineering Department for Jal Jeevan Mission qualify as exempt “pure services” under Notification 12/2017. The services meet three key criteria: they constitute pure services without goods transfer, are provided to state government (West Bengal), and relate to constitutional functions of Panchayat/Muni

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Pure Services for Water Distribution Network Support Under Jal Jeevan Mission Qualify for GST Exemption
Case-Laws
GST
The AAR ruled that services provided by the applicant to the Public Health Engineering Directorate (PHED), Government of West Bengal, qualify for GST exemption as “pure services.” The services involve technological support for water distribution networks under Jal Jeevan Mission, including system maintenance, data management, and application development, without any good

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Period of Three Months Under Section 107 CGST Act Must Be Counted As Calendar Months, Not Days
Case-Laws
GST
HC examined interpretation of limitation periods under Section 107 of CGST Act 2017. The period of “three months” for filing appeal and “one month” for condonation of delay should be interpreted literally, not converted to 90 days and 30 days respectively. Following precedent from a recent arbitration case, HC determined that three-month period should be calculated calendar month

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =