Goods and Services Tax

High Court sets aside GST determination order under Section 73 for violating natural justice principles
Case-Laws
GST
HC set aside determination order under Section 73 of Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 for violating principles of natural justice. Despite respondents' claim of granting hearing opportunity, no notice was served to petitioner indicating such opportunity. Though interim stay was granted by HC, final orders imposing liability were issued immediately after stay expired without court disposal of writ petition. Section 75(4) of CGST Act mandates opportunity of hearing before adverse orders. HC held that respondent should have waited for writ petition disposal and issued fresh notice for hearing after stay expiry. Impugned order violated natural justice principles. Order set aside, respondent directed to pass fresh orders after granting proper hearing opportunity with sufficient notice. Petition allowed.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Petitioner may secure goods release with bank guarantee worth 20% of proposed penalty under Section 122 WBGST/CGST Act
Case-Laws
GST
HC challenged SCN issued under Section 122(1)(xviii) read with Section 35(6) of WBGST/CGST Act, 2017 regarding seizure of goods without recording satisfaction as mandated under Section 67. Petitioner exclusively supplies goods to Ministry of Defence with subsisting work orders for Indian Army. Court directed petitioner may seek goods release by furnishing bank guarantee equivalent to 20% of proposed penalty amount in SCN dated 27th May, 2025. Upon written application with requisite bank guarantee, proper officer must release goods within three working days. Court noted SCN appears issued under Section 122 read with Section 35(6), requiring proceedings under Section 73 or 74. Final decision on SCN restrained without court's leave. Matter listed for July 2025 consideration.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST registration cancellation quashed conditionally after petitioner failed filing returns for six consecutive months
Case-Laws
GST
The petitioner's GST registration was cancelled via Form GST REG-19 due to failure to file returns for six consecutive months. The HC applied the precedent established in Tvl.Suguna Cutpiece Centre v. The Appellate Deputy Commissioner, which balanced revenue interests with taxpayer rights. Following this precedent and its recent application in Tvl.Blue Diamond Engineers, the HC directed the petitioner to comply with conditions stipulated in the Suguna Cutpiece Centre decision. Upon compliance with these specified conditions, the impugned cancellation order would be quashed. The writ petition was allowed at the admission stage, providing conditional relief to the petitioner subject to fulfilling the prescribed requirements.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST registration cancellation revoked after non-filing GSTR-3B returns for six months under Section 29
Case-Laws
GST
HC directed CGST Superintendent to revoke petitioner's GST registration cancellation which occurred due to non-filing of GSTR-3B returns for six consecutive months and failure to respond to GSTR-3A notice. Following precedent in Krishanu Borthakur, court held that excluding assessee from GST regime would prevent collection of statutory dues, contrary to revenue interest. HC ordered respondent to intimate outstanding statutory dues to petitioner and restore GST registration upon payment of any outstanding amounts. Writ petition disposed with direction for reconsideration of revocation application and restoration of registration subject to compliance with statutory obligations.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Delhi adopts CBIC circular clarifying GST rate regularization under Section 168 for interpretational doubts
Circulars
GST – States
The Delhi State Tax Department adopted CBIC Circular No. 236/30/2024-GST clarifying the scope of “as is/as is, where is basis” regularization in GST matters. The circular, issued under Section 168 of CGST Act 2017 following GST Council's 54th meeting recommendation, addresses field formation doubts regarding tax regularization where competing rates existed. The clarification establishes that regularization applies when genuine interpretational doubts arose between different GST rates, allowing taxpayers who paid lower rates to treat such payments as full discharge of liability without additional payment obligations. However, those who paid higher rates receive no refunds, and regularization excludes cases where no tax was paid at all. The circular provides three illustrations demonstrating application scenarios involving rate differentials of 5%, 12%, and nil rates, emphasizing that regularization only validates actual payments made at declared rates in filed returns, not non-payment situations.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST adjudication order quashed over building classification as plant under Section 17(5)(d) for input tax credit
Case-Laws
GST
The HC partially allowed the petition challenging GST adjudication proceedings under Section 73 following audit under Section 65 of the GST Act. The primary legal issue concerned interpretation of “plant or machinery” under Section 17(5)(d) regarding whether buildings qualify as “plant” for input tax credit restrictions. The Court quashed the impugned adjudication order dated 28.02.2025 and restored proceedings to the first respondent for fresh consideration, ensuring complete adjudication. The petitioner's deposited 10% of the demand amount was directed to be held by respondents pending conclusion of restored proceedings. The matter was remanded for proper reconsideration of the classification issue.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Assessment order quashed for denying personal hearing despite valid GST Portal service requiring alternative methods under Section 169
Case-Laws
GST
HC set aside assessment order dated 14.08.2024 for violation of natural justice principles where petitioner was denied personal hearing opportunity. Though show cause notice was uploaded on GST Portal constituting valid service, respondent failed to explore alternative service modes under Section 169 GST Act when petitioner remained non-responsive. Court held that officers must utilize other prescribed service methods like RPAD when portal service proves ineffective to avoid empty formalities and multiplicity of litigation. Matter remanded to respondent for fresh consideration conditional upon petitioner depositing 25% of disputed tax amount within four weeks. Petition allowed by way of remand emphasizing effective service requirements over mere procedural compliance.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Petitioner's Section 128A CGST Amnesty Scheme benefit claim remitted for fresh consideration following Balaji Packaging precedent
Case-Laws
GST
The HC disposed of the petition concerning proceedings under Section 73 of the CGST Act and entitlement to benefit under the Amnesty Scheme introduced by Section 128A of the CGST Act, 2017. Following identical circumstances in Balaji Packaging's case, the Court set aside the impugned order and remitted the matter to the respondent for fresh reconsideration in accordance with law. The petitioner had expressed intention to avail benefits under the Amnesty Scheme provisions of Section 128A of the CGST Act, warranting judicial intervention for proper consideration of the statutory relief mechanism.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST order quashed after payment under protest ruled not admission of liability under Section 74
Case-Laws
GST
The HC quashed an order under Section 74 of HP GST Act, 2017 imposing interest of Rs. 1,32,34,923/- and penalty of Rs. 1,11,45,134/- on the petitioner for alleged wrongful availment of Input Tax Credit. The court held that payment made 'under protest' cannot constitute admission of liability, as such payment inherently reserves the right to challenge the order while disputing the debt's validity. The HC relied on Black's Law Dictionary definition establishing that 'under protest' payment involves formal dispute of liability while making payment unwillingly. Consequently, the respondent was directed to issue fresh DRC-07 incorporating only the disputed tax amount, enabling the petitioner to file an appeal before the appellate authority. The petition was allowed.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Petitioner fails to prove natural justice violation in GST demand proceedings under Section 73
Case-Laws
GST
HC dismissed petitioner's challenge to order under Section 73 of WBGST/CGST Act, 2017. Petitioner contended proper officer predetermined outcome by serving Form GST DRC-01A notice before show cause notice, violating natural justice. Court found no irregularity as petitioner received adequate opportunity to respond to show cause before personal hearing was scheduled. Despite petitioner's claim of unawareness due to accountant change, Court noted petitioner continued portal operations and filing returns throughout proceedings. Section 75(4) permits hearing opportunity when adverse decision is contemplated. Petitioner failed to appear for scheduled hearing, thus cannot question the process. No predetermination or natural justice violation established. Petition disposed of without interference to impugned order.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Petitioner must provide GPS coordinates of business premises within two weeks for GST registration revocation under Section 30
Case-Laws
GST
The HC disposed of a petition concerning GST registration cancellation under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The petitioner had filed an application under Section 30 seeking revocation of the cancellation order, which remained pending due to non-compliance with the Authority's direction to furnish geo-tag coordinates (latitude and longitude) of business premises. The Court directed the petitioner to provide the GPS position of their office/place of business within two weeks, failing which the application would not be processed. Upon compliance within the stipulated timeframe, the Authority was required to consider and dispose of the revocation application. The petition was disposed of with these directions.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Petitioner allowed to file statutory GST appeal despite missing 90-day limitation period with conditions
Case-Laws
GST
The HC disposed of writ petitions challenging GST assessment orders in Form GST ASMT 14 for assessment years 2017-18, 2019-20, and 2020-21. The petitioner failed to file appeals before ADC (GST) Appeals within the statutory 90-day limitation period. Despite the Supreme Court's position against entertaining writ petitions after limitation expiry, the HC followed its consistent practice of allowing petitioners to file statutory appeals under similar circumstances. The court permitted the petitioner to file statutory appeal within 30 days from receipt of the order, subject to pre-depositing 25% of disputed tax through Electronic Cash Register or demand draft. The writ petitions were disposed of at admission stage with these conditions.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Petitioner's challenge to SCN succeeds as inadequate hearing violated natural justice principles, matter remanded for fresh adjudication
Case-Laws
GST
The HC allowed the petitioner's challenge to SCN and consequent order dated 31st March 2023, finding violation of natural justice principles due to inadequate opportunity of hearing. The court held that proper hearing rights were denied and remanded the matter to the Adjudicating Authority. The impugned order was set aside. The petitioner was granted extension until 15th July 2025 to file additional reply to SCN, after which the Adjudicating Authority must issue personal hearing notice. The petition was disposed of with directions for fresh adjudication ensuring compliance with natural justice requirements.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Assessment order set aside for ineffective service despite GST Portal upload under Section 169
Case-Laws
GST
The HC set aside an assessment order dated 19.12.2024 for violating principles of natural justice due to ineffective service of show cause notice. While uploading notices on the GST Portal constitutes valid service, the respondent failed to explore alternative service modes under Section 169 of the GST Act when petitioner remained non-responsive. The court held that merely fulfilling empty formalities without ensuring effective communication defeats the purpose and leads to multiplicity of litigation. The matter was remanded to respondent for fresh consideration, conditioned upon petitioner paying 25% of disputed tax amount within four weeks. The petition was allowed by way of remand, emphasizing that officers must apply their minds to ensure meaningful service rather than mechanical compliance.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Assessment order under Section 74 set aside for lack of reasoning and natural justice violation in typographical error case
Case-Laws
GST
The HC set aside an ex-parte assessment order under Section 74 for lack of reasoning and violation of natural justice principles. The petitioner challenged the assessment arising from a typographical error in their return where a decimal point was inadvertently omitted. The impugned order merely recorded issuance of show cause notice DRC-01A and absence of reply on the online portal, leading to ex-parte proceedings. However, the order failed to establish requisite findings of fraud, willful misstatement, or suppression of facts necessary for invoking Section 74. The HC found the order unsustainable due to absence of detailed reasoning and remitted the matter to the proper officer for re-adjudication in accordance with law.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Bengal to face Rs 25cr GST loss for relocation of SBI unit from Kolkata, claims civil society group
GST
Dated:- 22-6-2025
PTI
Kolkata, Jun 22 (PTI) Kolkata faces a potential state GST loss of nearly Rs 25 crore this fiscal year as the State Bank of India (SBI) moves to relocate its Global Market Unit (GMU) from Kolkata to Mumbai, a civil society organisation has claimed.
This proposed shift has drawn protests from civil society groups like Bank Bachao Desh Bachao Manch (Save Bank, Save Nation Platform), describing SBI's decision as “arbitrary and opaque”.
“The GMU and associated units contribute significantly to state revenues via GST, nearly Rs 25 crore this fiscal year. Additionally, over 70 contractual staff stand to lose t

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

s raised nor provided a rationale for the displacement of strategic banking operations.
The Manch then complained to the Centralized Public Grievance Redress and Monitoring System (CPGRAMS) under the Department of Administrative Reforms and Public Grievances.
Protestors have highlighted several concerns beyond the potential GST loss, including the disregard of historical and legal commitments, specifically a 2008 agreement between the bank and its federations to retain the GMU (which evolved from the erstwhile Foreign Department) in Kolkata.
The GMU's shifting is part of a “pattern of systemic marginalisation” of Kolkata's and West Bengal's institutional roles within India's banking landscape, the forum claimed. PTI BSM NN
News – Pr

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

CBI raids 7 places in Bihar, Jharkhand in Rs 100-crore GST fraud; customs officers in dock
GST
Dated:- 21-6-2025
PTI
New Delhi, Jun 21 (PTI) The CBI on Saturday searched seven locations in Bihar and Jharkhand in a 100-crore scam, allegedly executed by claiming GST through bogus export bills, with five customs officers, including the additional commissioner GST, Patna, as the main accused, officials said.
The CBI conducted searches at two locations in Patna, two in Purnea, and one each in Jamshedpur, Nalanda, and Munger, finding seven bars of gold, each weighing 100 grams, they said.
The scam was exposed when an abnormal increase in exports of tiles and automobile parts to Nepal was noticed in Land Customs Stations (LCS) in J

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

e created for amounts less than Rs 10 lakh, which is the highest amount that a customs superintendent is allowed to clear.
The CBI FIR alleged that, in all, fake exports to the tune of Rs 800 crore were shown by these superintendents with goods carrying GST duties of 28 per cent and 18 per cent, two of the higher GST slabs, which enabled them to claim refunds of around Rs 100 crore.
The investigation also showed that the firms were not functioning from their registered address.
As part of the fraud, the suspects presented 4,161 E-way bills of vehicles — two-wheelers, buses, and even ambulances. But the initial probe showed that none of the vehicles mentioned in the bills matched with the database of the SSB, the force that guards the

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Delhi Tax Commissioner adopts CBIC clarifications on Railway services, RERA collections, insurance reinsurance exemptions
Circulars
GST – States
The Delhi State Tax Commissioner issued Circular No. 22/2024 adopting CBIC Circular No. 228/22/2024 regarding GST applicability clarifications. The circular addresses eight key areas: exempting specific Railway services to general public and inter-zone transactions with retrospective regularization from October 2023; exempting SPV-Railway infrastructure transactions with regularization from July 2017; clarifying RERA statutory collections are exempt under existing notifications; confirming digital payment incentives shared per NPCI guidelines remain non-taxable subsidies; regularizing reinsurance GST liability for exempt insurance schemes from July 2017 to January 2018; regularizing government-premium insurance reinsurance from July 2017 to July 2018; clarifying reinsurance includes retrocession services; and exempting accommodation services under 20,000 monthly for minimum 90-day periods with retrospective regularization from July 2017. All regularizations apply on “as is where is” basis.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Registered persons can claim input tax credit on Ex-Works contracts upon delivery at supplier's factory gate under Section 16
Circulars
GST – States
The CBIC clarified that under Ex-Works contracts, registered persons can claim input tax credit upon delivery of goods at the supplier's factory gate, without requiring physical receipt at their business premises. Section 16(2)(b) of CGST Act mandates “receipt” of goods for ITC eligibility, but does not specify location. The Explanation deems goods “received” when delivered to transporters on the registered person's direction. In automobile sector EXW contracts, where property transfers at OEM factory gates upon handover to transporters, dealers can claim ITC immediately rather than awaiting physical delivery. This principle applies to all EXW contracts where goods are delivered at supplier's premises and property transfers upon handover, subject to other Section 16 and 17 conditions.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Delhi adopts CBIC circular requiring suppliers to record recipient state on invoices for online services to unregistered customers
Circulars
GST – States
The Delhi Department of Trade & Taxes adopted CBIC Circular No. 242/36/2024 clarifying place of supply rules for online services to unregistered recipients under GST. The circular mandates that suppliers providing online services, OIDAR services, or services through e-commerce operators to unregistered recipients must record the recipient's state name on tax invoices regardless of supply value. This recorded state name constitutes the address on record, making the recipient's location the place of supply under Section 12(2)(b)(i) of IGST Act. The clarification extends beyond OIDAR services to cover all online/digital services including OTT subscriptions, e-newspapers, and mobile app services. Non-compliance with mandatory invoice particulars may attract penalties under Section 122(3)(e) of CGST Act. Suppliers must establish mechanisms to collect recipient state details before service provision.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Delhi: 2 including lawyer held for running fake GST firm racket
GST
Dated:- 21-6-2025
PTI
New Delhi, Jun 21 (PTI) Two men, including a lawyer, were arrested for allegedly operating a racket involving fake Goods and Services Tax (GST) firms and issuing bogus bills to facilitate fraudulent tax settlements in south west Delhi, an official said on Saturday.
The accused were identified as Sandeep (27), from Panipat in Haryana, and Inderpal (45), a lawyer residing in Burari, Delhi.
The duo used genuine identification documents such as PAN cards, Aadhaar cards, SIM cards, rent agreements, and email IDs to register fake GST firms, which were then used to generate fraudulent invoices, Deputy Commissioner of Police (Southwest) Amit Goel

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

added.
Sandeep, who was arrested in Panipat, revealed that he had been working with Inderpal for seven years. Together, they procured bogus GST firms from associates in Delhi and manipulated login credentials to gain control over the accounts.
“They would then update the contact details- email and mobile numbers, and use Tally software to create and upload fake invoices on the GST portal. Following Sandeep's arrest, the police traced Inderpal to Kairana in Uttar Pradesh, where he had gone into hiding,” the DCP said in a statement.
After his arrest, Inderpal disclosed that he used to buy GST firms, along with SIM cards and login credentials, for Rs 25,000 to Rs 30,000 each.
After taking over the accounts, the duo would alter the credent

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

HC sets aside tax assessment order for 2018-19 due to natural justice violation, remands for fresh hearing
Case-Laws
GST
The HC set aside the impugned order dated 29.04.2024 passed by Respondent No. 3 concerning assessment period 2018-2019 without examining the merits. The court found violation of principles of natural justice as proper opportunity of hearing was not provided to the petitioner, and questions arose regarding service of show cause notice and time-bar issues. The matter was remitted to Respondent No. 3 with directions to grant personal hearing to the petitioner through authorized representative before passing fresh orders. The application was disposed of accordingly.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

CGST/WBGST Act 2017 allows simultaneous proceedings but taxpayers shouldn't face multiple enquiries for identical periods without logical conclusion
Case-Laws
GST
HC held that while CGST/WBGST Act 2017 does not expressly prohibit simultaneous proceedings under Chapter XIII and XIV, registered taxable persons should not ordinarily be subjected to multiple enquiries by different authorities for identical periods without logical conclusion of initiated proceedings. Where State authorities had already commenced search and seizure proceedings under Section 67 and conducted audit with show cause notice under Section 65, Central Authority (DGGI) should be restricted from proceeding simultaneously for same periods. Court directed DGGI enquiry be limited to periods not already under State investigation, considering Section 65(7) provisions and preventing duplicative enforcement actions against taxpayer for same tax periods.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Appellate authority violated natural justice by not serving notice to petitioner and passing non-speaking order under Section 107
Case-Laws
GST
The HC allowed the writ petition challenging an appellate order, finding violation of natural justice principles as the petitioner lacked adequate notice and was not served with the appeal petition and grounds. The appellate authority passed a non-speaking order without conducting necessary enquiry as mandated under Section 107(11) and (12) of the Act. While the appellate authority correctly identified the adjudicating authority's failure to examine Input Tax Credit legality and pass a speaking order, it failed to make further enquiry for a firm decision. The HC set aside both the impugned appellate order and the underlying adjudicating authority's order dated 30th October 2023, remanding the matter for fresh adjudication on merits. The petition was disposed of.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST registration cancellation show cause notice upheld but personal hearing ordered for suspended firm
Case-Laws
GST
The HC declined to quash a show cause notice (SCN) issued for GST registration cancellation against a firm found non-functional during investigation. The Court determined that petitioner could seek re-inspection from the Adjudicating Authority rather than judicial intervention at this preliminary stage. However, recognizing the firm's operational standstill due to registration suspension, the HC directed the respondent department to grant petitioner a personal hearing and issue appropriate notice. The Court emphasized proceedings must conclude in a time-bound manner given the business disruption caused by the suspended registration. The petition was disposed of with these procedural directions rather than substantive relief on the merits of the cancellation proceedings.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =