Goods and Services Tax

Petitioner granted bail after nearly a year, citing false implication and right to speedy trial; court stresses “bail is the rule.
Case-Laws
GST
Petitioner sought regular bail, contending false implication and non-impleadment of main accused. Petitioner underwent 11 months and 26 days of custody, with another case pending on bail. Charges framed u/ss 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC and Section 132 CGST Act, 2017. Court observed that out of 12 prosecution witnesses, only 3 examined till date, and

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Bail Granted for Wrongful Input Tax Credit Case Citing Custody Duration, Co-Accused Bail, and Right to Speedy Trial.
Case-Laws
GST
This is a judgment by the High Court granting regular bail to the petitioner accused of offenses u/ss 420, 467, 468, 471 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 132(1)(b) and (c) of the HGST Act, 2017, related to wrongful availment and utilization of Input Tax Credit (ITC). The court considered that the petitioner has already undergone substantial incarceration

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Court Confirms No Extensions Beyond Statutory Time Limits for GST Appeals Under Haryana GST Act 2017.
Case-Laws
GST
The High Court examined the issue of whether the Appellate Authority was legally correct in rejecting appeals filed beyond the time limit prescribed under the Haryana Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. It was found that while the petitioners had paid the pre-deposit for hearing the appeal, the appeals were admittedly filed beyond the limitation period, even exceeding the additional period of 30 days for condonation u/ss 107 and 35(1) of the Act. The provisions u/s 107 are not amenable to the Limitation Act, and the delay cannot be further condoned as the condonation is provided within the Act itself. Consequently, the

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Tax registration cancelled without hearing or reasons.
Case-Laws
GST
Order for cancellation of registration passed without providing opportunity of hearing or assigning reasons violates principles of natural justice. Coordinate Bench judgment held authorities should have considered transitional registration applications favorably during GST implementation. Despite directions, cryptic notice and order cancelling petitioner's registration issued without reasons. Appeal dismissed, precludi

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Unfair GST registration cancellation order quashed; due process ordered for show cause notice.
Case-Laws
GST
GST registration cancellation order passed without providing reasons or opportunity for hearing, violating principles of natural justice. Appellate authority dismissed appeal without considering petitioner's submissions. High Court quashed cancellation order and appellate order, remanding matter to assessing officer for issuing show cause notice and following due process. Petitio

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Advisory for Form GST DRC-03A
GST
Dated:- 6-11-2024

1. It has been observed that some taxpayers have paid the demanded amount vide DRC 07/ DRC 08/ MOV 09/ MOV 11/ APL 04 through DRC-03 instead of using payment facility 'Payment towards demand' available on GST portal. This led to a situation where demand has been paid by the taxpayer, however the demand is not closed in the electronic liability register. To address this issue, the government has notified a new form named GST DRC-03A which was notified vide Notification No. 12/2024 dated. 10th July 2024.
2. Accordingly, GSTN has developed the new Form GST DRC-03A on GST portal which is available now to adjust the paid amount through DRC-03 against the corresponding demand orde

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Advisory: Time Limit for Reporting e-Invoice on the IRP Portal – Lowering of Threshold to AATO 10 Crores and Above
GST
Dated:- 6-11-2024

Dear Taxpayers,
1. With reference to the earlier advisory dated 13th September 2023 (https://einvoice.gst.gov.in/einvoice/newsandupdates/read-602), where a time limit of 30 days for reporting e-Invoices on IRP portals for taxpayers with an AATO of 100 crores and above was implemented, the threshold has now been lowered to cover taxpayers with an AATO of 10 crores and above.
2. Therefore, from 1st April 2025, taxpayers with an AATO of 10 crores and above would not be allowed to report e-Invoices older than 30 days from the date of reporting on IRP portals.
3. This restriction would apply

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Negative blocking of ECL not allowed: Court upholds taxpayers' right to utilize ITC against GST liability.
Case-Laws
GST
The High Court held that the issue of 'negative blocking' of Electronic Credit Ledger (ECL) as per the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and Rules is no longer an open issue and stands concluded by its previous decision. The Court allowed the petition and set aside the orders disallowing debit from the ECL in excess of the available Input Tax Credit at the time

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Tax refunds release ordered within 3 weeks after petitioner's appeals allowed.
Case-Laws
GST
The High Court directed the respondents to release all refunds due and payable to the petitioner within three weeks, pursuant to the appellate authority's order dated July 4, 2024. This order was issued as the petitioner's statutory appeals and refund claims were inordinately delayed, compelling the petitioner to approach the Court. The Court disposed of the writ petition after the pending appea

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Court Nullifies Rule 96(10) for Violating Constitution; Halts IGST Refund Recovery Proceedings for Specified Period.
Case-Laws
GST
The High Court ruled on the constitutional validity of Rule 96(10) of the Central Goods and Services Tax (CGST) Rules, 2017, which was challenged as being ultra vires Section 16 of the Integrated Goods and Services Tax (IGST) Act, 2017, and violating Articles 14, 19(1)(g), and 265 of the Constitution. The court held that Rule 96(10), as inserted by a notific

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Movie theaters hiked ticket prices to offset GST cut – profiteering charges upheld.
Case-Laws
GST
Profiteering in GST rates for admission to cinema exhibitions. Despite a reduction in GST rates from 28% to 18%, the benefit was not passed on to consumers, and instead, the base price was increased to maintain a uniform “cum-tax” selling price. The High Court held that once the GST rate was reduced, it became mandatory for the petitioner to pass on the benefit of that reduction. There was

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Taxpayer wins right to claim input tax credit after 2024 retrospective amendments.
Case-Laws
GST
The Court held that due to amendments brought in by the Finance (No. 2) Act, 2024, the registered person is entitled to avail input tax credit for the relevant period subject to conditions prescribed under newly inserted Sections 16(5) and 16(6) of the CGST Act, 2017. The amendments, given retrospective effect from 01.07.2017, rendered the proceedings initiated against the petitioner through

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Court Invalidates Tax Order, Remands Case for Review Amid Retrospective Amendments; Input Tax Credit Claims Revived.
Case-Laws
GST
The High Court addressed the challenge to notifications extending the time limit for issuance of orders u/s 73 of the CGST/AGST Act, 2017, due to the “force majeure” condition of Covid-19. The Court noted that amendments introduced by the Finance (No. 2) Act, 2024, retrospectively effective from 01.07.2017, allowed registered persons to claim input tax credi

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Court Allows Input Tax Credit Claims for 2017-2021 Due to Covid-19 Force Majeure, Sets New Conditions for Future Claims.
Case-Laws
GST
The High Court addressed the extension of due dates u/s 73 of the CGST/AGST Act, 2017 due to the Covid-19 pandemic. It examined the provisions related to the time limit prescribed u/s 73 and the invocation of Section 168A, considering the “force majeure” condition. The Court observed that, notwithstanding Section 16(4), for financial years 2017-18 to 202

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Court lifts freezing of account; gives chance to reply to tax notice.
Case-Laws
GST
Interim order by High Court lifting attachment on petitioner's bank account pending final disposal, allowing petitioner opportunity to respond to demand notice issued under CGST Act. Court refrains from opining on merits, directs petitioner to appear before respondent authority on specified date for further proceedings in accordance with law. Petition disposed of.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick note

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Failure to Issue Proper Show Cause Notice Under GST Act Violates Natural Justice, Court Quashes Unsustainable Order.
Case-Laws
GST
Non-issuance of a proper Show Cause Notice u/s 73(1) of the State Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (AGST Act) prior to passing the impugned order u/s 73(9) violates principles of natural justice. Mere issuance of a Summary of Show Cause Notice and Attachment to Determination of Tax does not comply with Section 73(1) and Rule 142(1) of AGST Rules, 2017. Secti

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Court Upholds Tax Rule, Dismisses Petition Against Show-Cause Notice on Integrated Tax Refunds for FY 2018-21.
Case-Laws
GST
The High Court dismissed the petition challenging the show-cause notice dated 20.08.2024 issued by the respondent authority in relation to the refund of integrated taxes for the period FY 2018-19 to 2020-21. The court held that Rule 86(4B) of the CGST Rules, introduced vide Notification No. 14/2022-Central Tax dated 05.07.2022, allows recredit of input tax credit

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Unfair order quashed for violating natural justice; fresh hearing ordered despite appeal filed earlier.
Case-Laws
GST
Petition maintainable despite previously filed appeal. Order passed in violation of principles of natural justice by not allowing petitioner to file reply within stipulated time. Original order liable to be set aside. Fact of filing appeal against original order not a ground to refuse relief when order passed in violation of natural justice. Writ petition allowed, origin

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Breach of natural justice in tax order, GST portal notices unaware, fresh hearing ordered after partial payment.
Case-Laws
GST
The High Court set aside the impugned order dated 18.04.2024 passed by the 1st Respondent due to violation of principles of natural justice. The Petitioner was not aware of the show cause notice and reminder notices uploaded on the GST Portal, and no opportunity of personal hearing was provided before passing the order. The Court remanded the matter to the Respo

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST Registration Cancellation Overturned: Non-Response to Notice Insufficient Ground.
Case-Laws
GST
The High Court granted relief to the petitioner regarding the cancellation of GST registration due to non-submission of reply to the show cause notice (SCN). The court held that non-submission of reply to the SCN cannot be the sole ground for cancellation of registration. The impugned order cancelling the petitioner's registration did not provide any reason other than the failure to respo

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Assessee allowed to complete 2019-20 assessment; enforcement subject to court's final order.
Case-Laws
GST
The court allowed the application seeking permission to complete the assessment for the year 2019-20 in respect of the assessee petitioner. However, the court imposed a condition that if the assessment is adverse to the petitioner, it shall not be enforced and shall be subject to further orders on the petition. All contentions of the parties regarding the assessment were expressly

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Opportunity for personal hearing under GST Act: Mandatory if requested, not if ignored show-cause notice.
Case-Laws
GST
The court held that u/s 75(4) of the GST Act, an opportunity for personal hearing must be granted if requested in writing by the person liable for tax or penalty, or if an adverse decision is contemplated against such person. However, if the person chooses not to appear before the authority after receiving the show-cause notice, neither filing a reply nor requesting a

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Show Cause Notice Quashed for Violating Natural Justice; Case Remanded for Fresh Proceedings on Input Tax Credit Issue.
Case-Laws
GST
Violation of principles of natural justice and the challenge to the show cause notice (SCN). The SCN was challenged on the ground that it was in the nature of a final order, and the order-in-original was passed without providing an opportunity for a hearing. The issue pertained to the availment of input tax credit (ITC) from a fictitious firm, resulting i

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

High Court Upholds CGST Act's Restrictions on ITC Refunds for Inverted Duty Structure, Validates Exclusions for Exempt Services.
Case-Laws
GST
The High Court held that Section 17(2) of the CGST Act is not ultra vires Article 14 of the Constitution to the extent it restricts refund under the inverted duty structure. The petitioner does not have a vested right to claim refund of accumulated Input Tax Credit on goods and services due to the inverted duty structure under the first proviso t

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Taxpayer seeks refund of double GST & interest for late filing.
Case-Laws
GST
Refund of double tax paid by petitioner along with interest for November and December 2020 sought. Non-filing of GSTR-3B from July to December 2020. Petitioner to claim refund by appropriate application to authority as Insolvency Resolution Professional obtained GST registration in petitioner's name, now suspended. Impugned order confirming levy of interest and penalty quashed due to lack of show-cause notice

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =