Goods and Services Tax

Court rejects review plea; upholds GST order. No apparent error found. Petitioner's reliance on case-law misplaced.
Case-Laws
GST
Review petition dismissed for lack of grounds permissible under law. Court found no mistake or error apparent on record to warrant review of the impugned order passed with consent of parties. Petitioner's reliance on Bombay High Court decision misplaced as it dealt with typographical error. Petition devoid of merit, dismissed on contest without costs. Refusal

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Suspension upheld for GST officer over improper registration issuance without verification.
Case-Laws
GST
GST officer's suspension upheld based on allegations of issuing registration without proper verification. Registration issued to Prabhat Singh without verifying field survey report. Court found no infirmity in suspension order to prevent tampering of evidence. Respondents directed to complete disciplinary proceedings within six months. Petition dismissed.
TMI Updates – Highlight

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Bail Denied in Fraud Case Involving Fake Companies and Illegal Tax Credit Claims Under GST Laws.
Case-Laws
GST
A bail application was rejected in a case involving the creation of fake companies, appointment of fictitious directors/ partners/ proprietors, and illegal passing of inadmissible Input Tax Credit under the Goods and Services Tax (GST) laws. The accused, without the knowledge of the purported directors/staff, utilized invoices from fictitious suppliers to wrongfully avail and p

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Introduction of RCM Liability/ITC Statement
GST
Dated:- 24-8-2024

To assist taxpayers in correctly reporting Reverse Charge Mechanism (RCM) transactions, a new statement called "RCM Liability/ITC Statement" has been introduced on the GST Portal. This statement will enhance accuracy and transparency for RCM transactions by capturing the RCM liability shown in Table 3.1(d) of GSTR-3B and its corresponding ITC claimed in Table 4A(2) and 4A(3) of GSTR-3B for a return period. This statement will be applicable from tax period August 2024 onwards for monthly filers and from the quarter, July-September-2024 period for quarterly filers. The RCM Liability/ITC Statement can be accessed using the navigation: Services >> Ledger >

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

e hasn't paid corresponding liability by declaring the same in table 3.1(d) of GSTR-3B, in such cases taxpayer will be needed to fill a negative value of such excess claimed ITC as RCM as opening balance in RCM Statement.
* In case taxpayer need to reclaim the RCM ITC, which was reversed in earlier tax periods through Table 4(B)2 of GSTR-3B, if eligible, he can reclaim such RCM ITC in Table 4A(5) of GSTR-3B. Please note that such RCM ITC shall not be reclaimed through Table 4(A)2 and 4(A)3 of GSTR-3B. Such RCM ITC reversal need not to be reported as RCM ITC opening balance.
For Opening Balance pls reconcile till tax Period:
* Monthly filers:Report the opening balance considering RCM ITC till the July-2024 return period.
* Quarterly f

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Advisory for furnishing bank account details before filing GSTR-1/IFF Notification No. 38/2023 – Central Tax New Delhi, the 4th August, 2023
GST
Dated:- 24-8-2024

1. As per Rule 10A of Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017 notified vide notification no. 31/2019 dated 28.06.2019, a taxpayer is required to furnish details of a valid Bank Account within a period of 30 days from the date of grant of registration, or before furnishing the details of outward supplies of goods or services or both in FORM GSTR-1 or using Invoice Furnishing Facility (IFF), whichever is earlier.
2. Advisory and various communications have already been issued time to time to inform the taxpayers regarding furnishing the details of a valid Bank Ac

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Court Grants Interim Protection to Petitioner, Questions Validity of Tax Notification, Awaits Force Majeure Justification.
Case-Laws
GST
The High Court prima facie found the notification No. 56/2023 issued by the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs to be inconsistent with Section 168(A) of the Central GST Act, 2017. Consequently, any actions based on the said notification would fail. While acknowledging the petitioner's entitlement to reliefs proposed in the Financial Bill 2024,

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Revocation of GST registration: Court grants relief to petitioner due to lack of opportunity for personal hearing.
Case-Laws
GST
Rejection of petitioner's appeal u/s 107 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 for cancellation of GST registration. Petitioner explained delay in availing appellate remedies due to mitigating circumstances. Petitioner afforded opportunity to be heard in proceedings relating to revocation application but was remiss in not availing the same. Petitione

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Delay in communicating order extends time limit for filing appeal.
Case-Laws
GST
The High Court accepted the petitioner's contention that they were prevented from filing an appeal within the stipulated time due to the delay in communicating the impugned order. Despite the provision stating that the limitation period commences from the date of passing the order, the court held that since there is a provision for filing an appeal, it necessarily implies that the factual aspects shall be e

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Tax demand order set aside – Mismatch in GST returns; Pay 10% demand & reply to notice.
Case-Laws
GST
The court set aside the impugned order pertaining to tax demand arising from mismatch between GSTR 3B returns and auto-populated GSTR 2A, subject to petitioner remitting 10% of disputed tax demand and submitting reply to show cause notice within two weeks. The order was passed without considering petitioner's objections, necessitating opportunity to contest demand on merits.
TMI Upd

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Construction firm's revision plea wrongly dismissed on limitation by High Court.
Case-Laws
GST
Revision petitions filed within time limit granted by High Court, rejecting them on ground of li

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Tax Demand Challenge: Breach of Natural Justice as Court Grants Petitioner Another Chance After Initial Denial.
Case-Laws
GST
Violation of principles of natural justice occurred as the petitioner was not provided a reasonable opportunity to contest the tax demand on merits. The petitioner's reply enclosed only GSTR 9, GSTR 9C, and income tax documents, failing to provide all relevant documents to establish that the services fall within the scope of Section 9(3) of the applicable GST ena

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Goods and Services Tax Network (GSTN) is organising GST Analytics Hackathon to drive innovation in tax compliance through predictive analytics
GST
Dated:- 23-8-2024

Hackathon would take place over 45 days from the start of registration to the final date for submission of developed prototypes
The Goods and Services Tax Network (GSTN) is organising the GST Analytics Hackathon, an initiative to drive innovation in tax compliance through predictive analytics. This challenge invites Indian students, researchers, and professionals from startups and companies to develop a predictive model for GST analytics framework. The Hackathon would take place over 45 days from the start of registration to the final date for submission of develo

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Bail Granted in Alleged Fraud Case Over Wrongful ITC Using Fake Invoices; Conditions Include Travel Restrictions.
Case-Laws
GST
Petitioner sought regular bail in case involving alleged wrongful Input Tax Credit (ITC) availed using fictitious invoices from non-existent/suspicious firms. As per Section 132(1)(b) and (c) of HGST/CGST Act, issuing invoice without supply or availing ITC using such invoice, where tax evaded or ITC wrongly availed exceeds Rs. 500 lakhs, is punishable with up t

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Court dismisses petition challenging GST adjudication order for lack of hearing, directs filing appeal with costs.
Case-Laws
GST
Challenge to adjudication order u/s 73(9) of CGST/WBGST Act, 2017 – petitioners claimed no opportunity of hearing, violating principles of natural justice and CBIC circular. Court held petitioners' response was considered by proper officer as noted in order. Sufficiency of response cannot be subject matter of writ petition under Article 226. Though petitioners

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Accused of Rs.15 crore tax fraud through fake transactions, granted bail after 2 years in custody subject to bond & conditions.
Case-Laws
GST
The applicant sought regular bail, accused of availing wrongful input tax credit benefits worth Rs.15.58 crores through fictitious transactions with 38 firms. Considering the nature of allegations in the FIR, punishment of 5 years, arrest in June 2024, and attachment of applicant's firm assets, the High Court allowed bail upon executing a bond of

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Firm wins right to access GST records from authorities to challenge registration cancellation.
Case-Laws
GST
The High Court directed the respondent to provide the petitioner with physical or soft copies of the GST returns and documents available with the respondent, within one week. This order was issued in response to the petitioner seeking copies of these documents to enable pursuit of appellate remedies against the cancellation of the firm's GST registration. The petition was dispose

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Quashed order for lack of due process; remanded to allow hearing on import duty exemption for brooms.
Case-Laws
GST
The High Court quashed the impugned Order-In-Original dated 31.12.2020, which was passed in violation of principles of natural justice by not granting an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and not considering the petitioner's reply to the show-cause notice. The matter was remanded back to the adjudicating authority to pass a fresh de novo order after giving an opport

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Profiteering allegations dismissed for post-GST real estate project charging 8% GST + ITC.
Case-Laws
GST
The respondent commenced a real estate project “Swastik Heights” in the post-GST regime, with commencement certificate issued on 08.03.2018 and GST registration effective from 27.02.2018. Initially, GST was charged at 8% with input tax credit (ITC). From 01.04.2019, the respondent had the option to charge either 8% GST with ITC or 1% without ITC, but continued charging 8% with ITC. T

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Excess stock found during GST inspection? Initiate proceedings u/ss 73/74, not Section 130.
Case-Laws
GST
The High Court quashed the orders initiating proceedings u/s 130 of the GST Act against the petitioner for excess stock found during inspection/search u/s 67. It held that if excess stock is found, proceedings u/ss 73/74 of the GST Act should be initiated, not Section 130 read with Rule 120. The Court reiterated that the law is clear that Section 130 proceedings cannot be invoked if

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Order Overturned: Case Remanded for Ignoring Petitioner's Clarifications on Tax Filings, Violating Natural Justice Principles.
Case-Laws
GST
Principles of natural justice violated. Respondent disregarded petitioner's clarifications, GSTR 9 reconciliation, audited balance sheet, confirming show cause notice allegations through impugned order citing “incomplete documents” despite discrepancies in GSTR 1 and GSTR 3B filings. High Court held show cause notice issued 28.12.2023, petitioner f

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Court Sets Aside GST Order Due to Hearing Denial; Case Remanded After Turnover Discrepancy Explained, 10% Payment Required.
Case-Laws
GST
Petitioner challenged impugned order regarding GST discrepancies, failing to avail opportunity of personal hearing. Court held that notice was issued by respondent based on difference between turnover reported in Form 26AS and Form GSTR 3B. Petitioner replied that difference occurred as Form 26AS includes turnover from April 2017 to June 2017, prior t

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Deficient show cause notice on GST registration cancellation quashed for lack of specificity.
Case-Laws
GST
Impugned show cause notice for cancellation of GST registration lacks specific allegations, violating principles of natural justice. Notice merely reproduces rule without specifying invoices/bills issued without supply of goods or services. Purpose of show cause notice is to enable response to allegations, which is rendered meaningless without specifics. Impugned notice fails to m

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Tax authority breached natural justice in rejecting zero-rating application; Court allows partial relief on remitting 20% disputed tax.
Case-Laws
GST
Tax authority rejected rectification application filed by taxpayer for zero-rated supply citing violation of principles of natural justice. Court examined impugned order, found taxpayer's reply and documents were considered for most defects except two. For those two defects, court set aside impugned order subject to taxpayer remitting 20%

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Firm can appeal against GST penalty without further pre-deposit if conditions met.
Case-Laws
GST
The High Court held that once the petitioner made the payment of Rs.10 lakhs and furnished a bank guarantee for the balance amount as per the court's earlier order, the petitioner's right to file an appeal against the order u/s 129(3) of the WBGST/CGST Act, 2017 crystallized. The respondents cannot insist on further pre-deposit of 25% of the penalty determined u/s 129(3) for entertaining the

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Retrospective GST registration cancellation – Insufficient reasoning on tax credits. Matter remanded for reconsideration.
Case-Laws
GST
The High Court found that the respondents failed to properly consider the petitioner's contentions regarding the retrospective cancellation of GST registration of its suppliers and the petitioner's claim of having paid taxes on its supplies. The impugned order did not specifically state whether the suppliers had paid taxes for which the petitioner claim

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =