Goods and Services Tax

Case-Laws – GST – Highlights – The High Court dismissed the petition challenging the provisional attachment of the petitioner's bank accounts u/s 83(1) of the CGST/DGST Act. The court held that the pre-condition of initiation of proceedings under Chapter XII, XIV or XV was satisfied as proceedings u/s 67 had commenced prior to the attachment order. The contention that the attachment order's validity was limited until the conclusion of Section 67 proceedings was rejected. The court clarified that the only requirement is the commencement of proceedings under the relevant chapters, which was fulfilled. The petitioner's argument that the order should be set aside due to the controversy involving a question of law was also dismissed, as the object of provisional attachment u/s 83(1) is to protect government revenue, irrespective of the nature of the controversy. The court found the attachment order justified to safeguard government revenue based on the estimated GST value allegedly unpaid by the petitioner. – TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts Tax Management India – taxmanagementindia – taxmanagement – taxmanagementindia.com – TMI – TaxTMI – TMITax

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Case-Laws – GST – Highlights – The impugned show cause notice (SCN) for cancellation of GST registration was cryptic and failed to clearly outline the reasons, thereby violating principles of natural justice. It did not specify the alleged fraud, statements wilfully misstated, or facts suppressed. A show cause notice must enable the noticee to respond to allegations before any adverse order. The subsequent cancellation order also lacked reasoning, merely referencing the deficient SCN, and retroactively cancelled registration without proposing such action in the SCN. Despite allegations of availing ITC from non-existent firms and wrongful ITC passing, these were absent from the SCN. The petitioner's reply was unavailable due to illness, substantiated by medical proof. Consequently, the cancellation order was passed in violation of natural justice principles and set aside, with directions to restore the petitioner's GST registration forthwith. The petition was allowed. – TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts Tax Management India – taxmanagementindia – taxmanagement – taxmanagementindia.com – TMI – TaxTMI – TMITax

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Case-Laws – GST – Highlights – The court held that the impugned order and consequential recovery notice were issued in violation of principles of natural justice as the petitioner was not afforded an opportunity to establish their case before the authorities. The tax demand was recovered from the petitioner without due process. Consequently, the court set aside the impugned order and recovery notice. The matter was remitted back to the respondent authority for reconsideration after allowing the petitioner to file a reply and granting a personal hearing. The writ petition was disposed of accordingly. – TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts Tax Management India – taxmanagementindia – taxmanagement – taxmanagementindia.com – TMI – TaxTMI – TMITax

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Case-Laws – GST – Highlights – The High Court quashed the orders passed by the respondent assessing officer for violating principles of natural justice by not providing an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner, despite the petitioner seeking additional time to file replies to show cause notices. The Court remanded the matters back to the respondent for fresh consideration after setting aside the impugned orders, subject to the petitioner paying 10% of the disputed tax demand for each assessment year within six weeks. The case pertained to discrepancies in Input Tax Credits for multiple assessment years from 2018-19 to 2022-23, wherein show cause notices were issued through an online portal, and the petitioner had filed replies but was denied a personal hearing before passing of final orders. – TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts Tax Management India – taxmanagementindia – taxmanagement – taxmanagementindia.com – TMI – TaxTMI – TMITax

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Case-Laws – GST – Highlights – One-day delay in filing GSTR-3B for September 2020 led to reversal of ITC. Petitioner filed GSTR-3B on 23.10.2020, one day late. Respondent issued Form GST DRC-01A on 22.03.2024, proposing tax, interest, and payment by 05.04.2024. On non-payment, respondent initiated section 73(1) proceedings and issued impugned show cause notice dated 16.05.2024. GST Council recommended extending GSTR-3B filing deadline for 2017-18 to 2020-21 retrospectively from 01.07.2017. Court held one-day delay deserved consideration and reversal of ITC u/s 73(1) detrimental to petitioner's interest. Show cause notice dated 16.05.2024 set aside, writ petition allowed. – TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts Tax Management India – taxmanagementindia – taxmanagement – taxmanagementindia.com – TMI – TaxTMI – TMITax

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Case-Laws – GST – Highlights – Impugned orders were passed against petitioner without serving show cause notice or providing opportunity for personal hearing, violating principles of natural justice. Mere uploading of notices on GST Portal under 'View Notice and Orders' and 'View Additional Notices and Orders' tabs cannot be deemed sufficient service. As a small concern, petitioner was unaware of notices on portal until contacted by department. Orders passed ex parte without hearing petitioner are unsustainable and violate Articles 14 and 19(1)(g) of Constitution. Impugned orders set aside and matter remanded to department for fresh consideration after providing opportunity to petitioner. – TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts Tax Management India – taxmanagementindia – taxmanagement – taxmanagementindia.com – TMI – TaxTMI – TMITax

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Case-Laws – GST – Highlights – Order quashed due to violation of natural justice principles by not granting proper opportunity for personal hearing. Excess input tax credit availed on inputs subject to reverse charge mechanism and non-reversal of credit on reversed credit notes. Matter remanded for reconsideration after granting personal hearing to petitioner within stipulated timeframe. Final orders to be passed in accordance with law after following due process. – TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts Tax Management India – taxmanagementindia – taxmanagement – taxmanagementindia.com – TMI – TaxTMI – TMITax

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Case-Laws – GST – Highlights – The High Court rejected the application for grant of anticipatory bail filed by the applicants u/s 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code. The Court held that the application was not maintainable as the summons were issued u/s 70 of the CGST Act, 2017, which deals with the power of the appropriate officer to summon any person to give evidence or produce documents in an inquiry. The Court distinguished this from Section 69, which deals with the power to arrest a delinquent person. The Court relied on the Supreme Court's decision in Choodamani Parmeshwaran Iyer & Anr, which held that provisions of Section 438 cannot be invoked if summons are issued u/s 69. The Court found no significant difference between Sections 69 and 70 and held that the application for anticipatory bail was not maintainable and liable to be rejected. – TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts Tax Management India – taxmanagementindia – taxmanagement – taxmanagementindia.com – TMI – TaxTMI – TMITax

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Case-Laws – GST – Highlights – Notification No. 56/2023 prima facie appears ultra vires Section 168A of CGST Act, 2017 due to lack of GST Council recommendation, rendering consequential actions based on it invalid. Court finds examination required regarding force majeure applicability based on 49th GST Council meeting minutes, granting respondent authorities opportunity to present stance and materials. Interim protection granted to petitioners against impugned assessment order dated 26.04.2024 with no coercive action permitted until next date. Respondents directed to file affidavits by 19.08.2024. – TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts Tax Management India – taxmanagementindia – taxmanagement – taxmanagementindia.com – TMI – TaxTMI – TMITax

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Case-Laws – GST – Highlights – This case deals with the classification of supply and taxability under GST for the handover of building, civil structures, and railway siding constructed by the applicant on government land to a new lessee (OMCL). The key points are: 1) The transfer of building without ownership rights in the underlying land does not constitute a 'sale' under GST. 2) The consideration received by the applicant from OMCL for handing over the constructed assets is not merely a monetary transaction but constitutes a supply of service. 3) The applicant's agreement to refrain from removing the constructed assets against consideration from OMCL is treated as a supply of service under Entry 5(e) of Schedule II of the CGST Act. 4) This service is classifiable as 'Other Miscellaneous Service' (SAC 999792) and taxable at 18% GST rate. – TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts Tax Management India – taxmanagementindia – taxmanagement – taxmanagementindia.com – TMI – TaxTMI – TMITax

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Circulars – GST – States – Highlights – This circular clarifies various issues related to taxability and valuation of supply of services involving corporate guarantees provided between related persons. It covers applicability of Rule 28(2) of CGST Rules retrospectively, valuation methodologies based on amount guaranteed or actual consideration, treatment of partial loan disbursals, takeovers, co-guarantors, reverse charge mechanism for foreign guarantors, periodicity of valuation, benefit of value declared in invoice, and exclusion of exports from Rule 28(2). The circular aims to ensure uniform implementation across field formations. – TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts Tax Management India – taxmanagementindia – taxmanagement – taxmanagementindia.com – TMI – TaxTMI – TMITax

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Case-Laws – GST – Highlights – The High Court held that once a proper officer initiates proceedings on a subject matter under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (CGST Act) or the Haryana Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (HGST Act), no other proper officer can initiate proceedings on the same subject matter. The power exercised by the proper officer u/ss 69, 70, 71, and 72 of the CGST Act is judicial, and every inquiry is deemed a judicial proceeding. Issuance of a show cause notice marks the commencement of legal proceedings. The CGST Act and HGST Act do not provide for transferring proceedings from one proper officer to another. The State Tax Officer who initiated proceedings is empowered to summon evidence and documents. The availability of information about fraudulent ITC availed by related firms does not justify transferring proceedings to another authority. Independent action against other firms does not impede proceedings against the firm under investigation. New information can be shared with the investigating authority. The Excise & Taxation Officer lacked jurisdiction to transfer proceedings to the Central Government. The proceedings initiated u/s 74(1) of the HGST Act against the petitioner company shall continue with the Excise & Taxation Officer-cum-proper officer, who shall examine all aspects revealed relating to tax evasion or ITC. – TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts Tax Management India – taxmanagementindia – taxmanagement – taxmanagementindia.com – TMI – TaxTMI – TMITax

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Case-Laws – GST – Highlights – Doctrine of merger inapplicable. Cancellation of petitioner's registration without assigning reasons violates principles of natural justice. Reasons form heart and soul of judicial and administrative orders, absence renders order unjustified. Despite dismissal of appeal on ground of delay, doctrine of merger has no application considering facts. Rule 23 mandates service of notice to provide opportunity for revocation application, preventing permanent cancellation and business impediment. Coordinate Bench held that once returns accepted and no dues remain, Department should not obstruct business. Order cancelling registration quashed, petitioner directed to file reply to show cause notice within three weeks. Petition allowed. – TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts Tax Management India – taxmanagementindia – taxmanagement – taxmanagementindia.com – TMI – TaxTMI – TMITax

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Case-Laws – GST – Highlights – The petitioner challenged the impugned order and recovery notice issued by the respondent, claiming that the entire tax liability had been paid by reversing the wrongly availed Input Tax Credit (ITC). The court held that the petitioner had already paid the entire tax demand and was only seeking an opportunity to file a reply to the show cause notice and personal hearing regarding the imposition of interest and penalty, which the petitioner claimed not to be liable for. Additionally, as per the decision taken in the 53rd GST Council Meeting, the time was extended until March 31, 2025. By applying the proposed amendment to Section 128(A) of the Act, the petitioner was not liable to pay any amount since sufficient ITC was available. The impugned order was set aside, and the matter was remanded to the respondent for fresh consideration regarding the assessment years 2017-2018. Consequently, the final notice dated 05.05.2023 was also set aside. The petition was disposed of by way of remand. – TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts Tax Management India – taxmanagementindia – taxmanagement – taxmanagementindia.com – TMI – TaxTMI – TMITax

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Case-Laws – GST – Highlights – The High Court held that the Show Cause Notice (SCN) demanding Integrated Goods and Services Tax (IGST) on the activity of holding equity capital by the Holding Companies in the Petitioner company and on the External Commercial Borrowing (ECB) received by the Petitioner from AOSH was not properly considered. The court quashed the SCN insofar as it relates to the proposal to levy/demand GST on 'Continuous Equity Share holding' and remitted the matter back to the respondent for reconsideration after providing an opportunity to the petitioner regarding the issue of 'Value of the Credit Grant in Service determined as a service fee @1%'. The petitioner was granted liberty to submit its response on this issue within four weeks. – TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts Tax Management India – taxmanagementindia – taxmanagement – taxmanagementindia.com – TMI – TaxTMI – TMITax

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Case-Laws – GST – Highlights – Petitioner challenged assessment order for discrepancies between ITC claimed in GSTR-3B and GSTR-2A due to lack of time to furnish self-declarations from suppliers, violating natural justice principles. Court set aside impugned order, granting petitioner two weeks to file suppliers' self-declarations for reconsideration by respondent, disposing writ petition. – TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts Tax Management India – taxmanagementindia – taxmanagement – taxmanagementindia.com – TMI – TaxTMI – TMITax

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Case-Laws – GST – Highlights – Petition regarding cancellation of GST registration and seeking restoration. Delay of six months in filing returns. Court found petitioner's reason for non-compliance bona fide. Petitioner directed to file pending returns with tax dues, interest, and late fee within 45 days. Cancellation of registration revoked subject to fulfilling conditions. Petition disposed. – TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts Tax Management India – taxmanagementindia – taxmanagement – taxmanagementindia.com – TMI – TaxTMI – TMITax

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Case-Laws – GST – Highlights – Violation of principles of natural justice by not providing sufficient opportunity to the petitioner to substantiate their claim. The respondent wrongfully availed input tax credit on the purchase of motor vehicles, reflected in GSTR-2A, and the corresponding GSTR-3B, violating Section 17(5) of the TNGST/CGST Acts. The court held that the respondent's order was passed without giving reasonable opportunity to the petitioner, violating natural justice principles. The petitioner claimed unawareness of the notice issued through the GST Portal and could establish their case if given an opportunity. The petitioner's appeal against the impugned order was dismissed solely on the ground of no provision to condone the delay. Considering the facts and circumstances, the court condoned the delay in filing the appeal by the petitioner before the Appellate Authority in the interest of justice. The petition was disposed of. – TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts Tax Management India – taxmanagementindia – taxmanagement – taxmanagementindia.com – TMI – TaxTMI – TMITax

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Case-Laws – GST – Highlights – The court granted bail to the accused in a case involving clandestine supply of branded TMT bars and evasion of GST. The prosecution's case was based solely on the statement of Rippan Kansal, with no incriminating evidence found during the search and inspection of the applicant's premises. The court considered the reliability of the statement and observed that the alleged offense is punishable with a maximum imprisonment of five years. Given the applicant's prolonged incarceration since 20.6.2024 without trial commencement, the court opined that the applicant made out a case for bail. The bail application was allowed, subject to fulfillment of conditions imposed by the court. – TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts Tax Management India – taxmanagementindia – taxmanagement – taxmanagementindia.com – TMI – TaxTMI – TMITax

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Case-Laws – GST – Highlights – The respondent failed to process the petitioner's application for cancellation of GST registration, citing reasons such as the requirement to pay due tax and penalties, and submit details like stock register and bank statements. The court held that these grounds were untenable, as the cancellation of GST registration would not impinge upon the petitioner's liability to pay outstanding taxes and penalties. The scrutiny of the petitioner's tax liability for a prior period cannot be a ground for refusing cancellation of GST registration. The respondent was directed to process the petitioner's application for cancellation of GST registration, and the petition was disposed of. – TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts Tax Management India – taxmanagementindia – taxmanagement – taxmanagementindia.com – TMI – TaxTMI – TMITax

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Case-Laws – GST – Highlights – Grant of bail involving wrongful availment of input tax credit by generating fake invoices causing wrongful gain to companies and wrongful loss to the Government. Court analyzed whether evidence available against petitioner regarding committing offense under CGST Act. Held that absence of material indicating accused petitioner as manager of firms not essential for prosecution u/s 132 of CGST Act. Provisions state whoever commits or causes to commit and retains benefits from supplies without invoice or without supplying goods avails input tax credit is liable. Court below erred in assessing consequence and spirit of Section 132. Incriminating material against petitioner ignored. While considering bail, gravity of offenses and misconstruing facts and legal position not considered. Cancellation of bail allowed, order granting bail set aside. – TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts Tax Management India – taxmanagementindia – taxmanagement – taxmanagementindia.com – TMI – TaxTMI – TMITax

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Case-Laws – GST – Highlights – The case pertains to a violation of the principles of natural justice, wherein the petitioner's right to an opportunity for personal hearing, as provided under the law, was violated. The court held that Section 75 of the RGST Act/CGST Act contains provisions related to tax determination. Sub-section (2) states that if an Appellate Authority, Tribunal, or Court concludes that the notice issued u/s 74(1) is unsustainable due to non-establishment of fraud, willful misstatement, or suppression of facts to evade tax, the proper officer shall determine the tax payable as if the notice was issued u/s 73(1). The respondents admitted that although they intended to grant an opportunity for personal hearing and uploaded notices, the petitioner claimed these were not reflected on their GSTIN Portal. The court found the statutory mandate was not complied with, and impugned orders were passed without affording the petitioner an opportunity for personal hearing. Consequently, the matters were remanded to the competent authority to provide an opportunity for personal hearing and pass appropriate orders in accordance with the law. – TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts Tax Management India – taxmanagementindia – taxmanagement – taxmanagementindia.com – TMI – TaxTMI – TMITax

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Case-Laws – GST – Highlights – The petitioner's products were previously classified under heading 7615 of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975, but the Department contended that some products should be classified under heading 7607. The High Court had earlier allowed the petitioner's writ petitions challenging a similar order, following the Supreme Court's order in Commissioner of Central Excise vs. Hindalco Industries Limited, holding that the Aluminium Foil Container is classifiable under 7615 with 12% GST. Consequently, the High Court allowed the present writ petitions and directed the refund of the pre-deposited amount by the petitioner within 30 days, as the order was accepted by the Commissioner GST Central Excise, Madurai. – TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts Tax Management India – taxmanagementindia – taxmanagement – taxmanagementindia.com – TMI – TaxTMI – TMITax

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Case-Laws – GST – Highlights – The case pertains to revocation of cancelled GST registration due to non-filing of returns for a continuous period exceeding twelve months. The petitioner cited the resurgence of the COVID-19 pandemic as the reason for not conducting business during that period. The High Court referred to the Suguna Cutpiece case, where GST registration was restored subject to certain terms and conditions. Following the precedent, the court directed restoration of the petitioner's GST registration, contingent upon fulfilling the stipulated conditions. The petition was disposed of accordingly. – TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts Tax Management India – taxmanagementindia – taxmanagement – taxmanagementindia.com – TMI – TaxTMI – TMITax

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Case-Laws – GST – Highlights – The AAR ruled that organizing physical/offline games or tournaments of contract bridge played for money does not constitute supply of 'specified actionable claims' u/s 2(102A) of the GST Act, 2017. Contract bridge is predominantly a game of skill, not chance. The organizer neither provides an online platform nor retains any platform fee from players' contributions. The money contributed by players is deposited in a common pool, and the organizer has no lien over it. Organizing a tournament and allowing participation against a fee qualifies as supply of services by the organizer to participants. However, even if playing bridge for money is considered a 'specified actionable claim', the organizer cannot be deemed a supplier since they do not have control over the pooled money. Therefore, the organizer is not liable to pay GST for organizing physical/offline contract bridge tournaments played for money. – TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts Tax Management India – taxmanagementindia – taxmanagement – taxmanagementindia.com – TMI – TaxTMI – TMITax

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =