Goods and Services Tax

Project Delay Penalty Quashed: Court Sides with Firm for Timely Production Commencement.
Case-Laws
GST
The petitioner was directed to pay a 5% penalty of the prevailing plot cost for the belated implementation of the project as per Clause 2.1.2.(a) of O.O.No.30 of 2020. However, the petitioner complied with the clause by utilizing more than 65% of the plot and had commenced production before dispatching goods. Despite paying the penalty amount, the petitioner was again directed to pay a

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Court Upholds GST on Construction Services; Annuity Payments Taxable, Exemption Limited to Access Services Only.
Case-Laws
GST
The High Court dismissed the challenge to the Circular No.150/6/2021 GST dated 17.06.2021, which clarified that annuity payments for construction services are taxable under GST, contrary to the exemption under Sl. No.23-A of Notification No. 12/2017-CT(Rate). The Court held that the Circular did not contravene the Notification or the 22nd GST Council recommendat

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Quashing GST Order for Input Tax Credit in Light of Sadhana Enviro Case.
Case-Laws
GST
Petition seeking quashing of Order-in-Original passed u/s 73 of CGST Act, 2017, and Demand Order in GST 07 by Respondent 4. No excess claim of Input Tax Credit for 2019-20 as already denied for 2017-18. Court held issue covered by judgment in M/s. Sadhana Enviro Engineering Services case, where it was ruled that in view of amendment inserting Section 16(5) to CGST/KGST Act, petition should be disposed

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Unfair adjudication quashed; hearing opportunity denied. HC directs fresh probe upholding natural justice.
Case-Laws
GST
Order quashed due to violation of principles of natural justice. Petitioner not afforded opportunity of hearing after supply of documents. Directions issued by HC not followed. Finding on fraud allegation ipse dixit. Matter remanded to Joint Commissioner for fresh adjudication after providing opportunity of hearing, following HC directions, and dealing with fraud alle

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Tax Penalty Order Remanded: Court Rejects Denial Based on Clarification, Seeks Fresh Order.
Case-Laws
GST
The High Court held that the denial by the respondents to apply Section 129(1)(a) of the CGST/IGST Act based on the clarification dated 31.12.2018 and previous judgments was unjustified. The finding of the authority in Para-4 of its order was essentially factual and solely based on communication from CGST, Delhi regarding initiation of cancellation proceedings, without any evidence

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Court Finds Breach in Tax Order Service, Sets Aside Order; Petitioner Must Deposit 25% Disputed Tax Within 2 Weeks.
Case-Laws
GST
The High Court addressed the violation of principles of natural justice. The impugned order of assessment was not properly served on the petitioner, as it was merely uploaded on the common portal instead of being tendered or sent via RPAD. Consequently, the impugned order was set aside. The petitioner was directed to deposit 25% of the disputed tax within two

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Court Overturns Assessment Order for Violating Natural Justice; Allows Reconsideration of ITC Claims and Tax Liability.
Case-Laws
GST
The court found merit in the petitioner's submission that the impugned order of assessment violated principles of natural justice by traversing beyond the show cause notice, denying the petitioner an opportunity to present their case. Regarding the discrepancy between GSTR-2A and GSTR-3B, the court held that the order proceeded without considering the pet

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Reversal of ITC by GST authorities quashed for lack of personal hearing; remanded for fresh decision after hearing.
Case-Laws
GST
The High Court set aside the impugned order passed by the respondent in Form GST DRC-07, reversing the ITC availed by the petitioner. The respondent had passed the order without affording an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner, violating Section 75(4) of the CGST Act and principles of natural justice. The matter was remanded to the respondent fo

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Failure to Serve Notices Voids Tax Order; Case Remanded for Reconsideration Due to Violations of Natural Justice.
Case-Laws
GST
The petitioner was not served with notices/communications, resulting in their failure to file a reply within the stipulated time. As per the proviso to Rule 86B of the GST Rules, the petitioner is not liable to pay any tax amount. However, the petitioner, being unaware of the show cause notice, failed to appear for personal hearing before the respondent authori

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Ride-hailing app liable for GST on transportation services facilitated through its platform.
Case-Laws
GST
The e-commerce operator's nature of supply is conceptualized u/s 9(5) of the CGST Act, 2017, read with Notification No. 17/2017. The operator is liable to collect and pay GST on the supply of services provided by drivers/service providers to customers identified on the platform, under the proposed business model. The applicant falls within the definition of an electronic commerce o

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Pre-packed Ready-to-Eat Items Classified Under HSN 2004 10 10 Due to Cooking and Retort Preservation Processes.
Case-Laws
GST
The process involved in preparing pre-packed ready-to-eat items is not merely cooking but also includes preservation through retort technology. The appropriate classification for these items is under HSN 2004 10 10, as both preparation and preservation are applicable. According to the rules for interpretation of the Tariff, when goods cannot be classified by refe

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Contractor retains control, services classified as leasing/rental without operator; 18% GST applicable.
Case-Laws
GST
The applicant's services do not constitute a transfer of the right to use goods, as substantial control remains with the contractor and is not handed over to the user. The contracts in question are leasing or rental services without an operator, falling under Sl. No. 17 (viii) of Notification No. 11/2017 Central Tax (Rate) dated 28-06-2017. Such services attract GST at t

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Halwa branded by applicant classified as “sweetmeat” under GST, not “namkeen” despite same HSN code.
Case-Laws
GST
Packed halwa purchased from an outsourced manufacturer and marketed under the applicant's brand name is classifiable under HSN Code 2106 90 as “sweetmeats” and taxable at 2.5% CGST under Entry No. 101 of Schedule I of Notification No. 1/2017 Central Tax (Rate), dated 28-06-2017. Despite the same HSN 2106 90 appearing in Schedule II covering “Namkeens,” when a specific item

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ADVISORY FOR WAIVER SCHEME UNDER SECTION 128A
GST
Dated:- 8-11-2024

For reducing the tax disputes and to provide a big relief to the taxpayers, GST Council in its 53rd meeting held on 22nd June, 2024 had recommended for waiver of interest and penalties in the demand notices or orders issued under Section 73 of the CGST Act, 2017 (i.e. the cases not involving fraud, suppression or wilful misstatement, etc.) for the Financial years 2017-18, 2018-19 and 2019-20. To avail this waiver, the condition is that the full tax demanded is paid on or before 31.03.2025.
In view of the above, Rule 164 of CGST rules, 2017 was notified through Notification No. 20/2024 dated. 8th October 2024, effective from 1st November 2024. This rule provid

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Advisory related to ‘Other Territory’ applications
GST
Dated:- 8-11-2024

Dear Taxpayers,
As per Notification No. 2/2017-Central Tax dated 19th June, 2017 read with Trade Notice No. 01/2017-Central Tax dated 21st June, 2017 issued by Office of the Chief Commissioner of Central Excise, Mumbai Zone I and GST Trade Notice No. 002/2017 dated 20th June, 2017 issued by Central Excise Zone, Chennai, the applicant applying for new registration application and selecting the category of 'Other Territory' in the tab of State/UT in Part-A of GST registration form, shall only be administered under 'Mumbai South' or 'Chennai North' Commissionerate's and shall select centre jurisdiction as follows:
1. For 'Other Territory' pertaining to

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =