Goods and Services Tax

Improper revival of tax proceedings after initial satisfaction violates natural justice principles.
Case-Laws
GST
The High Court held that the proceedings initiated u/s 74 of the CGST Act, 2017 were vitiated as the Proper Officer had previously dropped the proceedings u/s 61(2) after finding the reply satisfactory. Initiating proceedings u/s 74 after dropping Section 61 proceedings violated the principles of natural justice. Consequently, the High Court quashed the order dated 14.06.202

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Insurance premium & reinsurance commission not 'supply' – Refund due on deposits made pending litigation.
Case-Laws
GST
The High Court held that the co-insurance premium and reinsurance commission would not be considered as supply and thus, the petitioners are entitled to a refund. The amounts deposited by the petitioner were not towards discharge of tax liability, but merely deposits pursuant to the court's order pending final adjudication. Since the utilization of these amounts for ta

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Taxpayer's plea dismissed; instructed to appeal against assessment order to Appellate Authority.
Case-Laws
GST
The High Court dismissed the petition on the ground of availability of an alternative statutory remedy of appeal against the assessment order. The petitioner challenged the assessment order citing limitation and violation of principles of natural justice. However, the Court held that whether the extended period of limitation applies and principles of natural justice were violat

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

High Court Revokes Bail, Clarifies Prosecution Criteria Under CGST Act for Misuse of Input Tax Credit.
Case-Laws
GST
The High Court cancelled the bail granted to the respondent Gautam Garg, finding that the lower court had misconstrued the facts and legal position u/s 132 of the CGST Act. The Court held that the absence of material indicating the accused as the manager of the firms is not essential for prosecution u/s 132, which covers those who “cause to commit” offenses related to ava

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Excess Credit Claim Quashed: Inadvertent IGST Omission Not Wrong Availment.
Case-Laws
GST
The High Court allowed the petition and quashed the order, declaring that the appellant shall not be seen as having availed excess credit for initiating proceedings u/s 73 of the GST Act. The case revealed no wrong availment of credit, and the appellant's mistake of omitting to mention IGST figures separately in Form GSTR 3A was inadvertent and technical, insignificant as there was no outward suppl

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Promotional freebies denied input tax credit, CGST Act upheld.
Case-Laws
GST
The High Court dismissed the petition, upholding the denial of input tax credit availed on goods purchased by the petitioner for sales promotion of manufactured goods for the respective assessment years. Section 17(5)(h) of the GST enactments prohibits input tax credit on goods disposed of by way of gift or free samples. The court held that the petitioner was not entitled to avail input tax credit on T-shirts a

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Hydraulic Firm's Imported Machinery ITC Claim Rejected Due to Bill Entry Discrepancy.
Case-Laws
GST
The Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling (AAR) ruled that R.V. Hydraulic Services is not eligible to claim Input Tax Credit (ITC) on the Integrated Goods and Services Tax (IGST) paid for the imported machinery (Davi Full Hydraulic Plate Roll). The Bill of Entry was in the name of M/s Promau SRL, C/o IMTEX, and not in the name of the applicant. As per Section 16(2)(a) read with Rule 36(1

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Lessor Must Pay 18% GST on Leasing Commercial Property to Government; Residential Lease Exemptions Not Applicable.
Case-Laws
GST
The Advance Ruling Authority held that the applicant, being the lessor and registered supplier of services for leasing a commercial property, is liable to remit Goods and Services Tax (GST) on the lease consideration u/s 9 read with Section 15 of the GST Act. The leasing of a commercial property to the Government of Andhra Pradesh for setting up the Institutio

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

High court gives relief, directs fresh hearing on depositing 50% dues if missed appeal deadline.
Case-Laws
GST
The High Court, considering that the petitioner's certain pleas were not taken into account while issuing the notice u/s 74(1) and that the limitation for filing an appeal had been lost, directed that if the petitioner deposits 50% of the demanded amount of Rs. 73,87,225.92, after adjusting any amount already paid within four weeks, the impugned order dated 24.07.2023 shall sta

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Petitioners' appeal against profiteering determination rejected; conditional stay on 50% deposit.
Case-Laws
GST
The High Court held that the petitioners have no right of appeal against the determination made by the authority regarding the profited amount u/s 171 of the CGST Act. However, as an interim relief, the Court granted a conditional stay, subject to the petitioners depositing 50% of the profited amount, excluding interest, within 8 weeks. The Court observed that granting such co

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Unfair tax assessment quashed due to lack of proper notice & hearing.
Case-Laws
GST
The High Court set aside the impugned order of assessment due to violation of principles of natural justice as the show cause notice and the order were not served properly to the petitioner. The petitioner was directed to deposit 25% of the disputed tax within four weeks and submit objections along with supporting documents within four weeks from receipt of the order. The respondent was directed to consi

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Tax evasion case dismissed: Trader failed to file GSTR-3B & pay GST despite self-assessing in GSTR-1. Court: No discretion allowed.
Case-Laws
GST
The High Court dismissed the writ petition. The petitioner failed to file GSTR-3B returns and discharge the tax liability, despite having self-assessed and filed GSTR-1. The court held there was no scope for exercising discretion by extending the payment period, as the petitioner ought to have filed GSTR-3B and paid the tax. Furthermore, more

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Taxpayers get relief: Delayed input tax credit allowed for 2017-2021 under amended CGST Act.
Case-Laws
GST
The High Court allowed the writ petition and set aside the impugned order. The matter was remitted back to the respondent authority to pass a fresh order on merits in accordance with the statutory amendment of Section 16(5) of the CGST Act, 2017. Section 16(5) permits belated availing of input tax credit for the assessment years 2017-2018 to 2020-2021, which was notified by the Cen

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Advisory on mandatory Sequential Filing of GSTR-7 Returns as per Notification No. 17/2024
GST
Dated:- 5-12-2024

Multiple tickets have been received regarding sequential filing of return in Form GSTR-7. Taxpayers are referencing FAQs for the same, wherein “it is not mandatory” is mentioned.
To clarify, It is to inform that following changes have been introduced in the return filing process for GSTR-7 with effect from 01.11.2024 onwards.
Sequential Filing of GSTR-7:
As per Notific

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Court Upholds Mandatory TRAN-1 Filing for Excise Credit, Dismisses Petition for Missing Deadline Under CGST Act 2017.
Case-Laws
GST
The High Court dismissed the writ petition. The petitioner, being a registered person not liable for registration before the appointed day of 01.07.2017, sought entitlement to transitional credit of excise duty through Credit Transfer Document by filing TRAN-3 without submitting TRAN-1 declaration within the stipulated time u/r 117 of the Central Goods and

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Empowering Additional/Joint Commissioners for adjudication of DGGI notices based on noticee's highest tax demand location.
Circulars
GST
The circular amends the previous Circular No. 31/05/2018-GST to empower more Additional Commissioners/Joint Commissioners of specified Central Tax Commissionerates with All India jurisdiction for adjudication of show cause notices issued by DGGI officers. It provides criteria for allocating such notices to the concerned Additional/Joint Commissioners b

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Authorities denied personal hearing despite request, order quashed.
Case-Laws
GST
The High Court quashed the assessment order dated 06.08.2024, holding that the Assessing Authority violated the principles of natural justice by denying an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner despite a specific request. Although the show-cause notice indicated 'NA' for personal hearing, the petitioner marked 'Yes' in the reply and sought an opportunity. The Court ruled that any previous oppor

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Refund denied if export proceeds realized in INR via non-resident Vostro bank account outside ACU/Nepal/Bhutan.
Case-Laws
GST
The High Court quashed the impugned orders denying refund application, based on the respondents' clarification that refund would not be denied if export proceeds are realized in Indian Rupees routed through a non-resident bank's freely convertible Vostro account outside the Asian Clearing Union or Nepal and Bhutan. However, the respondents contended that the appl

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Disputed tax case relief: 10% deposit required for stay on order pending appeal.
Case-Laws
GST
The High Court disposed of the writ petition, modifying the requirement to deposit only 10% of the remaining disputed tax amount for the impugned order to remain stayed. This decision was based on a Central revenue notification dated 16th August, 2024, reducing the deposit to 10%, and a corresponding State revenue notification dated 29th October, 2024. The petitioner's submission regarding the

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Court Overturns Penalties for Expired E-Way Bill, Citing No Tax Evasion or Malicious Intent, Emphasizes Contextual Application.
Case-Laws
GST
The High Court quashed the orders of the Appellate and Adjudicating Authorities imposing penalty on the petitioner for transporting goods after the expiry of the e-way bill. The Court held that while procedural compliance under the GST framework is crucial, penalties imposed purely for procedural lapses without evidence of tax evasion or malicious

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

High Court quashes penalty order for not generating e-invoices; directs refund.
Case-Laws
GST
The High Court quashed the order imposing penalty u/s 129(3) of the CGST/SGST Acts for not generating e-invoices. The court directed refund of any amount collected from the petitioner pursuant to the quashed order and ordered the competent authority to pass fresh orders after considering Sections 122 and 126 of the CGST/SGST Acts.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation,

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Court Declares IGST on Ocean Freight Unconstitutional, Orders Refund Due to Mistake of Law.
Case-Laws
GST
The High Court held that the levy of Integrated Goods and Services Tax (IGST) on ocean freight paid by the petitioner was unconstitutional. The Court relied on the Supreme Court's decision in Union of India & Anr. v. M/s Mohit Minerals Pvt. Ltd. and its own decision in Bla Coke Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India & Ors., wherein it was categorically held that when the Notification itself is

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Popular flour mixes with spices & ingredients classified differently, attracting higher 18% GST.
Case-Laws
GST
The appellant M/s. Gajanand Foods P Ltd's various flour mixes containing spices and ingredients like sugar, semolina, salt, sesame seed, chili powder, garam masala, etc. in addition to flours of dried leguminous vegetables, rice and wheat, were held to be excluded from classification under Chapter Heading 1102 or 1106 of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 attracting 18% GST. The prod

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Court upholds GST law, but allows challenge if petitioner's construction qualifies as 'plant'.
Case-Laws
GST
The High Court dismissed the writ petition challenging the constitutional validity of clauses (c) & (d) of Section 17(5) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The Supreme Court had previously upheld the validity of these clauses in the case of M/s Safari Retreats Private Ltd. However, the High Court granted liberty to the petitioner to raise the issue of whether the co

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Jurisdiction for tax notice under GST law: Conflicting HC views lead to Larger Bench reference.
Case-Laws
GST
The High Court held that the petitioner failed to establish lack of jurisdiction for issuance of the show cause notice (SCN) by the State Tax Authority, despite the absence of a notification u/s 6(1) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The Court opined that a notification is required only when restrictions or conditions are to be imposed on the exercise of power by

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =