Goods and Services Tax

GST detention penalty over suspect e-way bills and documents; writ challenge refused, taxpayer sent to Section 107 appeal
Case-Laws
GST
Writ jurisdiction against a penalty order under Section 129(1)(b) of the GST law was declined on the ground of efficacious alternative remedy under Section 107, since there was no breach of natural justice, no lack of jurisdiction, no vires challenge, and no established infringement of fundamental rights. The impugned order contained detailed factual findings, including doubts about the genuineness of documents and e-way bills, which required appellate fact-finding and could not be adjudicated on affidavits in writ proceedings; consequently, reliance on the 31 December 2018 circular to claim benefit under Section 129(1)(a) was not accepted. The taxpayer was relegated to statutory appeal, with directions to enable e-filing access. – HC
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST demand confirmation dispute: denied Section 75(4) personal hearing and demand beyond notice u/s 75(7), order quashed.
Case-Laws
GST
The dominant issues were whether the adjudication confirming GST demand was vitiated by (i) denial of a statutorily mandated personal hearing under Section 75(4) and (ii) lack of jurisdiction under Section 75(7) in confirming demand beyond the show cause notice. The authority held that once a personal hearing is specifically requested, Section 75(4) imposes a mandatory duty to grant it; passing an ex parte order despite such request is a fatal breach of natural justice and cannot be cured by later merits review, rendering the order unsustainable. It further held that any final demand exceeding the amount proposed in the show cause notice is ultra vires under Section 75(7), vitiating the order. The adjudication and appellate orders were quashed and the matter remanded. – HC
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Show cause notice for short GST payment and ITC irregularity u/s74 requires fraud or suppression; notice quashed.
Case-Laws
GST
Validity of a show cause notice issued under s.74 of the CGST Act turned on whether the department established fraud, wilful misstatement, or suppression as the causal basis for short payment/ITC irregularity. The court held that s.74 is jurisdictionally invocable only where such culpable intent is traceable; a notice lacking these foundational allegations and supporting material is without jurisdiction and liable to be set aside. On facts, the taxpayer had voluntarily intimated its intent to pay the shortfall prior to the enforcement investigation, negating any inference of fraud or suppression; consequently, denial of ITC by invoking the s.39(9) embargo did not arise. The notice was quashed and the petition allowed – HC
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Rule 86A electronic credit ledger blocking without hearing or recorded reasons to believe quashed as arbitrary
Case-Laws
GST
Blocking of the electronic credit ledger under Rule 86A was challenged on the ground that the authority neither afforded a pre-decisional hearing nor recorded independent “reasons to believe,” instead relying on enforcement reports amounting to borrowed satisfaction. Applying the binding precedent that Rule 86A can be invoked only upon valid, sufficient material forming the officer's own reasons to believe, and that absence of reasons and reliance on another authority's satisfaction is impermissible, the Court held the impugned blocking orders arbitrary and violative of natural justice. The blocking orders for multiple tax periods were quashed and the writ petition was allowed. – HC
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

SEZ tax demand for Jul 2017-Mar 2018 challenged over retroactive Rule 30(4) amendment; order quashed as jurisdictionless
Case-Laws
GST
The dominant issue was whether the demand for July 2017 to March 2018 could be confirmed by relying on an amended Rule 30(4) of the SEZ Rules and a subsequent circular. Since both the amendment (effective from 21.09.2018) and the circular (dated 12.09.2019) operated prospectively, their application to the earlier tax period was contrary to the governing rules and records, rendering the demand without jurisdiction or authority of law; the impugned order was set aside. Although an appeal under Section 107 of the KGST Act existed, writ jurisdiction was exercised because the order suffered from patent lack of jurisdiction; the petition was allowed – HC
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Statutory tax appeals dismissed for delay despite same-day reply and hearing dates; orders set aside, appeals restored on deposit
Case-Laws
GST
The dominant issue was whether dismissal of the statutory appeals solely for delay was sustainable where the assessee was effectively denied a reasonable opportunity to respond and be heard, since the dates for filing reply and personal hearing were fixed on the same day (or with only a one-day gap), offending principles of natural justice. The Court held that, notwithstanding limits on the appellate authority's power to condone delay, the impugned dismissal orders required interference to secure justice. The dismissal orders were set aside and the appeals were restored subject to deposit of a specified sum within ten days; the demand was made conditional on the appellate outcome. – HC
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Input tax credit disallowance for supplier-recipient mismatch: Section 42 notice to suppliers required before Section 73 action; notice quashed.
Case-Laws
GST
Disallowance of input tax credit was challenged on the ground that proceedings under Section 73 were initiated only against the recipient without first following the statutory mechanism under Section 42 against the suppliers. The Court held that Section 42(3) mandates issuance of a discrepancy notice to both supplier and recipient, and Section 42(5) permits fastening output tax liability on the recipient only if, after such communication, the supplier fails to rectify the discrepancy in the prescribed return. Since no proceedings/notices were initiated against the suppliers before issuing the show cause notice to the recipient, the notice was without jurisdiction and was quashed, with liberty to proceed against the suppliers. – HC
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST collections rise 16 pc till Nov; excise revenue surges over 8 pc: Punjab FM
GST
Dated:- 23-12-2025
PTI
Chandigarh, Dec 23 (PTI) Punjab Minister Harpal Singh Cheema on Tuesday said the state's GST collections rose 16.03 per cent to Rs 17,860.09 crore till November this fiscal, and excise revenue mop-up increased 8.64 per cent to Rs 7,401 crore.
Attributing this success to a harmonious framework of innovation and vigilance, the minister highlighted that the Excise and Taxation department has not only surpassed previous benchmarks but also successfully implemented the One-Time Settlement (OTS) Scheme-2025 and advanced data analytics to dismantle tax evasion.
Reviewing the sectoral performance, the finance, planning, excise an

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ambitious annual collection target of Rs 11,020 crore.
“By November 2025, the department has already registered an 8.64 per cent increase in excise revenue over the same period last year,” the minister said, adding that this follows the record-breaking performance of the previous financial year 2024-25, where revenue grew by 16.36 per cent to reach Rs 10,723 crore.
He also emphasised that enforcement remains a priority, with 3,860 FIRs lodged and 3,795 arrests made this year to curb liquor smuggling and illicit distillation.
Cheema further added that another major highlight of the year was the success of the One-Time Settlement (OTS) Scheme-2025, which has disposed of 3,574 cases as of December 18, 2025, yielding Rs 52 crore in total re

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

CBI arrests CGST official for accepting Rs 5 lakh bribe
GST
Dated:- 23-12-2025
PTI
New Delhi, Dec 23 (PTI) The CBI has arrested a Central Goods and Services Tax (CGST) superintendent in Mumbai for allegedly accepting a bribe of Rs 5 lakh from a private company after threatening the firm with a tax demand of Rs 98 lakh, officials said Tuesday.
Ankit Aggarwal, posted as Superintendent in CGST-1, Mumbai made a demand of Rs 20 lakh from the company but during negotiations he dropped it to Rs 17 lakh and sought immediate part payment of Rs 5 lakh to be delivered on Monday, they said.
The director of the company approached the CBI with a complaint on Monday following which the agency registered a case and planned a trap operation

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST portal show-cause notice hidden under “Additional Notices” tab, denying hearing; proceedings set aside and remanded.
Case-Laws
GST
The dominant issue was violation of principles of natural justice where the show cause notice was uploaded only in the “Additional Notices” tab on the GST portal and was not effectively brought to the taxpayer's knowledge, resulting in no reply being filed. Applying prior precedent in similar portal-notice situations, the Court held that absence of a real opportunity of hearing vitiated the adjudicatory process, particularly since the notice pre-dated the portal changes that later made the tab visible. The impugned proceedings were therefore set aside and remanded to the adjudicating authority to grant a fair opportunity to respond and be heard – HC
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST registration cancellation for non-filed returns challenged; revocation allowed after tax, interest, late fees paid and returns filed.
Case-Laws
GST
Cancellation of GST registration for non-filing of returns was challenged. Since the petitioner had already deposited the outstanding tax along with interest and late payment charges as if the returns had been duly filed, the Court held that justice warranted permitting filing of the pending GST returns. It further held that if the returns, upon scrutiny, were found not in accordance with law, the petitioner must immediately pay any consequential demand raised by the authorities. On such compliance, the cancellation order was directed to be treated as revoked and the petition was disposed of. – HC
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Delay in statutory appeal filing blamed on counsel's wife's hospitalization; no medical proof, so condonation denied and writ dismissed
Case-Laws
GST
Challenge to dismissal of the statutory appeal as time-barred beyond four months turned on whether sufficient cause was shown for condonation. The petitioner relied on alleged hospitalization of counsel's wife but produced no supporting medical documents or counsel declaration either before the appellate authority or with the writ, despite repeated opportunities and adjournments, including after refiling following registry objections. In the absence of any material substantiating the pleaded cause, no arbitrariness or perversity was shown warranting interference under Article 226. The writ petition was dismissed, affirming rejection of the appeal on limitation. – HC
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

IGST refund for exported goods denied for missing Rule 96A LUT/bond; rejection set aside, claim remanded for reconsideration.
Case-Laws
GST
Rejection of IGST refund for exported goods solely on the ground that the exporter had not furnished bond/LUT prior to export under Rule 96A of the CGST Rules was held unsustainable because the governing circular clarifies that non-furnishing of LUT/bond is not an incurable or strictly mandatory defect and may be accepted ex post facto depending on the facts and purpose of the refund claim. Since the refund authority failed to consider and apply the circular while rejecting the claim, the rejection order was set aside and the refund application was remitted for fresh consideration in accordance with law. – HC
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Excess input tax credit claim decided ex parte while key notifications under challenge; orders set aside, matter remanded
Case-Laws
GST
Ex parte adjudication and appellate orders denying the taxpayer's claim of excess input tax credit were challenged for breach of natural justice and for proceeding despite the governing notifications being under consideration before the apex forum. Since the validity of the relevant notifications was sub judice and likely to affect the impugned proceedings, the matter required fresh consideration to avoid conflicting decisions and multiplicity of proceedings. The adjudication orders and the appellate order were set aside and the case was remitted to the adjudicating authority to pass a fresh order in accordance with law after the pending challenge to the notifications is disposed of. – HC
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST registration cancellation against deceased sole proprietor: notices to dead person held void; orders quashed, fresh action allowed
Case-Laws
GST
Proceedings for cancellation of GST registration initiated and concluded against the deceased ex-proprietor were void ab initio, as notices and orders must be issued to the legal representative and not to a dead person; such actions are a nullity and non est in law. Applying this principle, the impugned cancellation orders were quashed, with liberty to the department to initiate fresh proceedings in accordance with law against the appropriate legal representative, if permissible. Petition allowed – HC
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Refund claim for GST paid on transfer of assignment rights-Form GST RFD-03 deficiency memo quashed; application revived for processing.
Case-Laws
GST
A deficiency memo issued in Form GST RFD-03 under Rule 90(3) rejecting a refund claim on the ground that no GST Council notification/circular existed on refund relating to GST paid on transfer of assignment rights was challenged. The Court held that such a ground could not sustain rejection at the deficiency memo stage and the refund application was required to be processed in accordance with law. Consequently, the deficiency memo was quashed, the refund application was revived, and the authorities were directed to pass a reasoned order on the refund claim within three weeks of receipt of the revived application. – HC
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST appeal delayed due to non-functional Tribunal; liberty to file appeal on operationalisation, s.112(9) stay continues meanwhile
Case-Laws
GST
Given the non-functional status of the GST Appellate Tribunal, the writ petitioner sought liberty to pursue the statutory appellate remedy once the Tribunal becomes operational. Relying on relevant executive notifications and circulars evidencing constitution/operationalization of the Tribunal, the Court directed that upon the President/State President assuming office, the petitioner may file an appeal under the CGST/SGST framework with the requisite statutory pre-deposit, and the appellate authority shall decide it in accordance with law. The statutory stay under s.112(9) shall continue until disposal of the appeal, failing which recovery may proceed if the appeal is not filed within limitation. – HC
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Motor vehicle chassis transport seized over e-way bill expiry from wrong auto-filled Part-B distance; penalty quashed
Case-Laws
GST
Seizure of goods and levy of penalty were challenged on the ground that the e-way bill validity allegedly expired due to an auto-generated Part-B showing an incorrect distance. The goods were motor vehicle chassis duly accompanied by tax invoice, e-way bill, sale certificate, and temporary registration, and the delivery location was specifically reflected in the documents. As the distance field was auto-populated after Part-A and was not editable by the taxpayer, the authority had no basis to infer tax evasion, and mere expiry of an e-way bill was held insufficient to establish intent to evade tax. The seizure and penalty order was quashed and the petition was allowed – HC
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST s.73 recovery proceedings challenged over no hearing and non-application of mind; recovery orders quashed as arbitrary
Case-Laws
GST
Recovery proceedings under s.73 of the GST Act were challenged on the ground that no opportunity of hearing was afforded and the impugned orders reflected non-application of mind. Applying the principle that an order passed without due application of mind is arbitrary and fails the Article 14 test, and noting the breach of natural justice, the Court held the recovery action legally unsustainable; consequently, the impugned orders were quashed and the writ petition was allowed. – HC
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST summons over alleged s.132 tax evasion by client firms: chartered accountant's limited role leads to anticipatory bail
Case-Laws
GST
Anticipatory bail was sought apprehending arrest for alleged offences under s.132 of the Central/Gujarat GST Acts pursuant to summons under s.70. The court held that the core allegation of tax evasion pertained to the applicant's client firms, whereas the applicant, being only a chartered accountant maintaining/auditing accounts, was not engaged in supply/manufacture/trade and could not be treated as the person liable to pay GST for any alleged evasion by those firms; statutory recovery mechanisms apply against the liable taxable persons. Applying the liberal and fact-specific discretion under s.438 CrPC, anticipatory bail was granted subject to bond/surety and conditions. – DSC
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Alleged goods-less invoicing and ineligible CENVAT credit claim challenged for missing documents; writ dismissed for non-participation, appeal available
Case-Laws
GST
Challenge to adjudication alleging fraudulent availment of ineligible CENVAT credit on the ground that relied-upon documents were not supplied was rejected because the noticee was fully aware of the show-cause notice yet neither filed any substantive reply nor effectively participated in adjudication, leaving the allegations unrebutted. Given the nature of alleged goods-less invoicing and complex, evidence-intensive transaction chains, the dispute required factual examination unsuitable for writ jurisdiction, and the noticee's interests were adequately protected by the statutory appellate remedy. The writ petition was dismissed. – HC
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

SVLDR Scheme eligibility for second show-cause notice after cut-off date: rejection upheld, but late appeal permitted
Case-Laws
GST
Eligibility to avail the SVLDR Scheme for a second show cause notice issued after the Scheme's prescribed cut-off date was the dominant issue. The Court held that mere cross-reference to an earlier notice, or reliance on documents from it, does not render the later notice a continuation of the earlier proceedings; the later notice was an independent demand with separate quantification and adjudication. Since notices issued beyond the Scheme deadline are ineligible, rejection of the Scheme application for the later notice was upheld. However, to avoid denial of statutory remedies due to pendency of the writ, the petitioner was permitted to file an appeal against the adjudication order within the extended time granted. – HC
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST fraud: Four booked for setting up fake firms, claiming Rs 22.06 crore ITC
GST
Dated:- 21-12-2025
PTI
Thane, Dec 21 (PTI) A case has been registered against four persons in Maharashtra's Thane district for allegedly creating fake GST-registered firms and claiming input tax credit of more than Rs 22.06 crore, police said on Sunday.
Based on a complaint lodged by an official from the State Goods and Services Tax (SGST) department, the police in Kalyan on Thursday registered a case

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Post-sale discounts via financial credit notes and GST input tax credit reversal-when ITC stands, and valuation shifts
Circulars
GST – States
Input tax credit under the WBGST Act need not be reversed by a recipient where payment is reduced due to financial/commercial credit notes issued for secondary/post-sale discounts, because such credit notes do not reduce the original transaction value or the supplier's tax liability and therefore do not reduce tax charged. A manufacturer's post-sale discount to a dealer is not “consideration” for the dealer's onward supply to an end customer where there is no manufacturer-end customer agreement and the discount merely reduces the dealer's sale price; consequently, no additional GST consequence arises on that ground. Where the manufacturer has an agreement with an end customer and funds the dealer's discounted sale, the discount forms part of consideration for the dealer's supply to the end customer, affecting valuation accordingly. Post-sale discounts are not consideration for promotional services unless specific services and consideration are contractually defined, in which case GST applies to that service supply.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Goods detained over wrong “ship to” PIN code on e-way bill; Section 129 detention and penalty orders quashed.
Case-Laws
GST
Proceedings under Section 129 of the CGST Act were initiated solely because the e-way bill reflected an incorrect PIN code for the “ship to” location, though the consignee details and destination (Samastipur, Bihar) were otherwise correctly stated and the goods were accompanied by requisite documents including tax invoice, e-way bill and GR. Applying the legal position that a mere PIN code error, when the consignor/consignee address is otherwise correct, does not justify detention proceedings under Section 129, the impugned detention and penalty orders were held unsustainable and were quashed, and the writ petition was allowed. – HC
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =