Goods and Services Tax

Case-Laws – GST – Highlights – The Advance Ruling Authority determined that the levy of GST on liquidated damages constitutes a supply of service under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act. Liquidated damages received for breach of contract or non-performance are considered income and fall under the definition of consideration for tolerating an act, thereby attracting GST. The imposition of compensation or penalty is governed by the Indian Contract Act to prevent defaulting acts. Compensation for tolerating non-performance constitutes a supply of service, making such payments subject to GST. – 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 – AAR analyzed the issue of GST levy on sewerage water treated by GVSCCL and supplied to industries. Water falls under Chapter heading 2201 of GST Tariff. Two schedule entries exist for water under CGST Act: one exempting drinking water at 12% tax and another taxing waters not containing sugar at 18%. The treated water supplied by applicant is not potable, thus not covered under entry for drinking water. The treated water qualifies as purified water, taxed at NIL rate under Notification No. 02/2017-C.T. (R). – 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 involves a query regarding the classification of goods and services for GST purposes. The applicant sought clarification on the consideration charged for supplying aggregates and recovering royalty charges. The ruling determined that the applicant's tax collection on royalty charges and goods supplied separately in invoices indicated distinct transactions. Royalty charges were classified under SAC 997337, attracting 9% CGST and 9% SGST, while aggregates fell under HSN code 251710, subject to CGST @2.5% and SGST @2.5%. The ruling emphasized the separate nature of the transactions, not constituting mixed or composite supply. – 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 addressed an issue where the petitioner couldn't upload a reply to a show cause notice (SCN) regarding discrepancies between their GSTR 1 and GSTR 3B filings. The court determined that the tax proposal was confirmed due to the petitioner's failure to respond to the SCN. To ensure justice, the court set aside the order, requiring the petitioner to pay 10% of the disputed tax demand within two weeks. The petitioner was granted the opportunity to contest the tax demand on merits by submitting a reply to the SCN within the specified period. This decision disposed of the 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 – The Competition Commission of India found that the Respondent engaged in profiteering by not passing on the benefit of reduced GST rates to ticket recipients, resulting in a profiteered amount of Rs. 48,25,970. The Respondent was directed to reduce ticket prices and deposit the profiteered amount with interest. The amount was to be split between the Central and Telangana State Consumer Welfare Funds. The Respondent was given 3 months to comply, failure of which would lead to recovery by the tax authorities. While the Respondent violated Section 171(1) of the CGST Act, 2017, the penalty u/s 171(3A) could not be imposed retrospectively as it was not in effect during the violation period. Application 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 High Court addressed the issue of tax levy and penalty related to the release of a vehicle transporting goods without proper documents beyond the destination. The court rejected the mechanical detention of the consignment based on insufficient grounds provided by the respondent. It also emphasized that undervaluation alone cannot justify the seizure of goods in transit. As no evidence of undervaluation was presented, the appeal of the revenue was deemed meritless and dismissed, with costs made easy for the respondent. – 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 reviewed a challenge to an assessment order, focusing on the violation of natural justice principles and the issue of input tax credit entitlement due to transactions with a non-existent supplier. The Court found that the respondent's conclusion about fake invoices lacked supporting details for the petitioner to counter. Additionally, the petitioner failed to provide necessary documentation like lorry receipts and weighment slips, impacting the fulfillment of Section 16(2)(b) requirements. The Court ordered reconsideration with the petitioner agreeing to remit 20% of the disputed tax demand for a remand, subject to existing credits. The impugned order was set aside, contingent on the petitioner remitting 20% of the disputed tax demand within three 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 – The High Court addressed the issue of time limitation in filing an appeal, specifically focusing on the condonation of delay. The appeal was filed beyond the prescribed time limit, and the key ground for rejecting it was the date of physical re-filing. The Court noted that the appeal was initially filed online on a specific date, and the subsequent physical filing occurred later. A rule change regarding the date of appeal filing was discussed, emphasizing the importance of the acknowledgment date. The Court concluded that the delay should be condoned as per the amended rule, directing a fresh consideration of the matter. 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 High Court considered the maintainability of a refund claim regarding GST on health care services. The court noted the principle of unjust enrichment and the availability of alternative remedies like appeal u/s 107 of the Act. It emphasized that the power of writs under Article 226 is discretionary, with the existence of an alternative remedy generally barring its use. The court found that the petitioners had not shown the orders to be without jurisdiction, nor challenged the legislation's validity. Therefore, the court dismissed the petition, stating that the petitioners had an alternative efficacious remedy through the statutory appeal 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 – In a case concerning the levy of GST on Extra Neutral Alcohol (ENA), the High Court held that the petitioner failed to provide a reasonable explanation for not submitting a written explanation or seeking a personal hearing in response to a show-cause notice issued by the tax authority. The Court emphasized that the petitioner had the opportunity to explain the reasons for not complying with the notice before challenging it in court. As the petitioner did not avail this opportunity, the Court dismissed the petition, ruling it as not maintainable. – 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 reviewed the validity of the show cause notice (SCN) and assessment order u/s 129 of the CGST Act. The issue centered on penalty imposition due to non-updation of the e-way bill resulting from goods transfer to another vehicle. The court found no evidence of intent to contravene the Act or evade tax. Consequently, a general penalty of Rs. 25,000 was imposed on the petitioner u/s 125 of the CGST Act. The impugned notice and order were set aside, with a direction for the respondents to refund the tax after deducting the penalty. The court deemed it just to levy the maximum penalty of Rs. 25,000, ultimately allowing the 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 – The High Court addressed the cancellation of GST registration due to failure to file returns for over six months u/s 29 of the GST Act. The court held that cancellation must be supported by reasons. The lack of reasons provided by the authority and the petitioner's subsequent payment of arrears led the court to deem the cancellation arbitrary and violative of the right to carry on business under Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution. As a result, the court quashed the order canceling the registration, allowing the petitioner's 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 – The High Court addressed a challenge to an assessment order regarding the reversal of Input Tax Credit for credit notes issued by the supplier. The court found that the requirements under sub-section (3) of Section 15 of the GST statutes were not satisfied, leading to the supplier being liable to pay tax on the full value of supply. The court highlighted the discretionary nature of jurisdiction under Article 226, noting that the existence of an alternative remedy does not bar its exercise. Despite the petitioner approaching the appellate authority for other issues, the court exercised jurisdiction due to the need for evidence reappraisal. The impugned order was set aside only concerning the reversal of Input Tax Credit, and 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 High Court reviewed an assessment order challenged for being unreasoned. The Court found that the order lacked proper reasoning as it confirmed the tax proposal without explanation, rendering it unsustainable. The order was set aside, and the case remanded for reconsideration. The respondent was instructed to grant the taxpayer a fair opportunity, including a personal hearing, and issue a new order within three months. Consequently, the bank attachment linked to the assessment order was lifted. The petition was disposed of through 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 considered a case involving refund of accumulated credit due to inverted tax structure u/s 54(3) Proviso and Rule 89(5) of CGST Rules. The court held that the orders rejecting the refund claims were quashed and remanded for fresh consideration by the adjudicating authority. The petition was disposed of by way of remand for proper review of the refund claims in line 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 High Court reviewed penalties imposed for lack of e-way bills, noting violations of natural justice and lack of proper consideration. Bank Guarantees expired without renewal, leading to penalties. Petitioner directed to pay Rs. 15 Lakhs to PM Cares Fund and Rs. 75,000 to State GST authority. Petitioner exempt from GST on machinery movement. Penalty reduced to Rs. 25,000. Petitioner to donate Rs. 15 Lakhs to PM Cares Fund. Respondent No. 3 to investigate staff responsibility for expired Guarantees. Writ petition concluded. – 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 considered the maintainability of a writ petition challenging an assessment order under the Tax Legislation. The court held that generally, when a statutory appeal remedy is available, a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India would not be entertained. However, exceptions exist. The court noted that if an assessment order is challenged on the grounds of cross jurisdiction, the order can be interfered with. The court directed the petitioner to file a review application before a Single Judge to raise arguments on the issue of jurisdiction based on relevant judgments. – 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 addressed a case involving a violation of natural justice principles due to the petitioner not having a fair opportunity to contest a tax demand. The court noted that the petitioner's GST registration was canceled without sufficient opportunity to address discrepancies in returns. The court set aside the order canceling the registration and remanded the matter for reconsideration. The petitioner was directed to remit 10% of the disputed tax demand within three weeks for further proceedings. The petition was disposed of by way of remand for a fair opportunity to contest the tax demand on merits. – 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 addressed a case involving a violation of natural justice principles due to the non-receipt of show cause notice or impugned order until a recovery notice was received. The notice for a personal hearing was returned as “no such person in the address.” The court noted that the petitioner had proof of residence at the address in question after purchasing a house. Consequently, the court set aside the impugned order but required the petitioner to pay Rs. 50,000 towards the tax demand within three weeks of receiving the court's order. 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 High Court considered a case involving the cancellation of GST registration due to a non-speaking order issued without providing supportive documents or adequate notice to the petitioners. Citing the importance of natural justice principles, the Court emphasized the need for an opportunity to be heard when civil consequences are likely. The Court found that the lack of material evidence provided to the petitioners along with the show cause notice rendered the subsequent order non-speaking and unjust. Drawing parallels to a previous case, the Court concluded that the petition should be allowed based on the violation of natural justice principles. The petition was granted in favor of the petitioners. – 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 – Highlights – The circular addresses the taxability of ESOP/ESPP/RSU provided by a company to its employees through its overseas holding company. It clarifies that the transfer of securities/shares by the foreign holding company directly to employees of the Indian subsidiary company, and subsequent reimbursement of costs by the subsidiary company to the holding company, does not constitute an import of financial services liable to GST. The circular emphasizes that such transactions are not considered supplies of goods or services under GST law. However, if the foreign holding company charges additional fees, GST would be leviable on such amounts as consideration for facilitating the transaction. The circular highlights that no supply of services occurs when securities/shares are transferred directly, but GST applies if additional fees are charged. – 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 – Highlights – The Circular addresses the mechanism for verifying compliance with Section 15(3)(b)(ii) of the CGST Act, 2017 by suppliers offering discounts through tax credit notes post-supply. It clarifies that such discounts can be excluded from taxable value if conditions are met, including the recipient's reversal of input tax credit. As no portal functionality exists for verification, suppliers may obtain a certificate from recipients, issued by a Chartered Accountant or Cost Accountant, confirming the reversal. For discounts under Rs 5,00,000, an undertaking from the recipient suffices. These certificates/undertakings serve as evidence for compliance and must be produced when required by tax authorities. Trade notices should disseminate this Circular's content for awareness. – 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 – Highlights – The circular clarifies the treatment of input tax credit in relation to life insurance premiums not included in taxable value. The circular explains that such premiums are not to be considered as pertaining to a non-taxable or exempt supply under the CGST Act. As per the Insurance Act, life insurance policies may include an investment component, but the portion of premium not included in taxable value does not qualify as exempt supply. Therefore, there is no requirement to reverse input tax credit for such premiums as per Rule 42 of the CGST Rules. The circular aims to ensure uniformity in the implementation of tax provisions 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

= = = = = = = =

Circulars – GST – Highlights – The circular discusses the time limit u/s 16(4) of the CGST Act, 2017 for availing input tax credit (ITC) on reverse charge mechanism (RCM) supplies from unregistered persons. It clarifies that the relevant financial year for ITC availment is the year in which the recipient issues the invoice u/s 31(3)(f) of the CGST Act, subject to tax payment. Delayed issuance of invoice may attract interest and penalties under the CGST Act. The circular aims to ensure uniformity in implementing the law and suggests issuing trade notices for awareness. – 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 – Highlights – The circular addresses the valuation of imported services from a related person when the recipient is eligible for full input tax credit. It clarifies that where no consideration is involved, and the activities are not considered supplies by the related person in India, the value declared in the invoice by the recipient may be deemed the open market value. The circular references Rule 28 of the CGST Rules, emphasizing that where full input tax credit is available to the recipient, the declared value in the invoice is deemed the open market value. It extends the principles applied to domestic related parties to foreign entities providing services to related parties in India. The recipient in India must pay tax under the reverse charge mechanism and issue a self-invoice. The circular instructs field formations to publicize its content and invites feedback for implementation issues. – 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

= = = = = = = =