Goods and Services Tax

Taxpayer's filing error led to notice, but lack of show cause notice & order on portal made the order unsustainable. Court set it aside.
Case-Laws
GST
Inadvertent error committed by taxpayer in filing GSTR-3B return led to issuance of Form GST DRC-01A. However, upon examination, it was observed that detailed show cause notice and order were not available or uploaded on the portal. Consequently, the impugned order could not be sustained. The High Court set aside the order, allowing the r

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST registration woes after family feud: Court orders swift processing sans NOC.
Case-Laws
GST
Writ petition disposed of directing respondents to process petitioner's application for GST registration within two weeks without insisting on No Objection Certificate. Petitioner had dispute with brother-in-law and mother-in-law after husband's death, leading to inability to carry on business due to expiry of old GST registration in absence of co-operation. Court found no impediment in allowi

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Discrepancies in GST returns ignored petitioner's replies, violating natural justice; order set aside for reconsideration.
Case-Laws
GST
Judicial review of an assessment order was conducted due to discrepancies between GSTR 1 and GSTR 3B returns. The petitioner's replies were not considered, violating natural justice principles. The High Court held the order unsustainable as the petitioner's replies were not taken into account while recording conclusions. Consequently, the impugned orde

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Retrospective amendment allows IGST refund for exporters who paid tax on imported inputs.
Circulars
GST
This circular clarifies the regularization of refund of IGST availed in contravention of rule 96(10) of CGST Rules, 2017, where exporters had imported inputs without paying integrated taxes and compensation cess. It states that if exporters initially imported inputs without paying IGST and cess by availing exemption notifications, but later paid the dues along with interest and got th

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Indian Data Hosting Services to Overseas Cloud Providers Clarified as Export; Not Intermediary or Property-Linked.
Circulars
GST
The circular clarifies the place of supply for data hosting services provided by Indian service providers to overseas cloud computing service providers. It addresses three issues: whether the data hosting service provider qualifies as an intermediary, whether the services relate to goods made available by the recipient, and whether they directly relate to immovable property. The key points are: 1) Data hosting service providers do not qualify as intermediaries facilitating supply between cloud providers and end-users, as they provide services on a principal-to-principal basis. Hence, place of supply canno

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Demo vehicles: ITC eligibility for dealers to promote sales.
Circulars
GST
This circular clarifies the availability of input tax credit (ITC) on demo vehicles used by authorized dealers of motor vehicles. Key points are: ITC is available on demo vehicles used for demonstrating features to potential buyers as they promote further supply of such vehicles. However, ITC is blocked if demo vehicles are used for staff transportation. For dealers acting as agents providing marketing services,

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Determining Export Benefits for Indian Advertising Agencies: Place of Supply and Intermediary Status Explained.
Circulars
GST
This circular clarifies the determination of place of supply and export benefits for advertising services provided by Indian advertising agencies to foreign clients. Key points are: advertising agencies providing comprehensive advertising solutions, including media planning, content creation, and procurement of media space, are not considered intermediaries under

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Supreme Court: Fresh Grounds Needed for Renewed Asset Attachment Orders; Provisional Order Quashed.
Case-Laws
GST
Provisional attachment order u/s 83 of the Act expires after one year. The department cannot issue a second notice for provisional attachment without providing fresh reasons. The Supreme Court held that a second attachment may be made, but the department must justify it with new grounds. Allowing repeated attachments without fresh reasons would render Section 83(2) redundant

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Tax authorities advised voluntary payments without legal basis, quashed by court.
Case-Laws
GST
The High Court quashed a letter dated March 13, 2024, issued by the Superintendent (A.E.) Central Goods and Service Tax, Gautam Budh Nagar, advising voluntary tax payments without proper legal basis. The Court observed that the Department was advising the petitioner to make voluntary payments without issuing any show cause notice/demand notice/recovery notice, which is unknown in law. The res

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST Authorities Must Follow GST Act Procedures Before Prosecution; IPC Use Without Sanction Is Invalid.
Case-Laws
GST
The High Court held that GST Authorities cannot launch prosecution invoking penal provisions under the Indian Penal Code without invoking penal provisions of the GST Act, when the alleged offenses are covered under the GST Act provisions. This is especially true without obtaining sanction u/s 132(6) of the GST Act. The GST Act is a special legislation comprehensively dea

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Denial of personal hearing before issuing adverse order on excess ITC claim & GST short payment violates natural justice.
Case-Laws
GST
Violation of principles of natural justice by not granting opportunity of personal hearing before issuing adjudication order demanding excess availment of Input Tax Credit and short payment of output GST, despite adverse decision being contemplated against petitioners. Section 75(4) of GST Act mandates granting opportunity of hearing in such cases, irre

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

High Court Annuls Assessment Order for ITC on Motor Cars, Citing Lack of Communication and Natural Justice Violation.
Case-Laws
GST
The petitioner challenged the assessment order and summary in Form DRC-07 for wrongfully claiming Input Tax Credit (ITC) on the purchase of four motor cars, which was ineligible u/s 17(5) of the CGST/TNGST Act, 2017. The petitioner was unaware of the notices due to the introduction of a new “View Additional Notices and Orders” feature on the GST portal, whi

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Delayed GST appeal allowed after precedent; GSTR non-filing condoned on conditions.
Case-Laws
GST
The petitioner's appeal against cancellation of GST registration was filed beyond the condonation period prescribed u/s 107(4) of the GST Act. The petitioner had not filed GSTR returns for over six months. In an identical batch of matters, the Madras High Court allowed writ petitions subject to fulfilling certain conditions. Following this precedent, the Court allowed the present writ petit

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Real estate firm's GST claim rejected, Court orders reconsideration on rising material costs.
Case-Laws
GST
This case pertains to the denial of a GST claim for differential tax liability arising from increased prices of materials and wages. The respondent, BUIDCo, expressed no objection to remanding the matter to the concerned authority for fresh consideration. Consequently, the High Court set aside the impugned order dated 16.11.2019 and remanded the matter to the Chief General Manager

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Tax demand discrepancies led to unlawful property attachment despite pre-deposit made, prompting court relief.
Case-Laws
GST
The High Court granted relief to the petitioner by directing the release of attachment over immovable properties due to discrepancies between GSTR 3B returns and auto-populated GSTR 2A. Despite making the requisite 10% pre-deposit of the disputed tax demand, the attachment was effected contrary to statutory provisions. The court held that once the pre-deposit is m

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Court Rules in Favor of Petitioner on GST Classification, Quashes Notices, and Directs Regularization of Past Returns.
Case-Laws
GST
Challenge to show cause notice u/s 74 of Central/Gujarat Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 regarding classification of product manufactured by petitioner under HSN 19059040 instead of HSN 19059030 and consequent levy of GST. Court held that in view of minutes of GST Council meeting and circular dated 1st August, 2023, issue was to be regularized on 'as is w

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Seizure and Penalty Orders Quashed for Lack of UP E-way Bill; Court Cites Non-enforceability During March 2018.
Case-Laws
GST
Seizure order for detention of goods due to absence of State E-way Bill was challenged. The Court held that at the time of interception, the Central E-way Bill under GST Act was available, and only the E-way Bill under UP GST Act was not present, which was later produced before passing the penalty order. The issue was covered by previous Division Bench judgments,

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Taxpayer denied natural justice; GST reconciliation errors reconsidered after proof of payment.
Case-Laws
GST
The court held that the petitioner was denied the principles of natural justice by not being given a reasonable opportunity to contest the tax demand on merits regarding the difference between GSTR 3B and GSTR 1, and the RCM liability mismatch. The petitioner provided proof of payment for the GSTR 3B and GSTR 1 difference, and substantiated the RCM liability mismatch as an inadv

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Unfair tax demand due to lack of proper communication; order set aside for reconsideration after partial payment.
Case-Laws
GST
Principles of natural justice violated due to lack of proper communication regarding show cause notice and order, leading to tax demand confirmation without petitioner's response. Court set aside the order and remanded matter for reconsideration, subject to petitioner remitting 10% of disputed tax demand within two weeks, acknowledging procedural lapse despite

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Tax demand adjournment rejected despite valid reasons; opportunity granted on part-payment.
Case-Laws
GST
Principles of natural justice violated due to lack of reasonable opportunity to contest tax demand. Petitioner cited ongoing tax audit and father's illness for seeking adjournment, but failed to submit substantive reply from September 2023 to February 2024 despite sufficient time. Considering health records submitted, petitioner granted opportunity to contest demand by remitting 10%

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Petitioner wins stay on recovery, must appeal & pre-deposit 10% tax (excluding 'Fish Meal') within 30 days.
Case-Laws
GST
The High Court, considering the precedent set in the case of Rehoboth Fish Meal and Oil Plant, held that the petitioner should be granted a stay on recovery proceedings pending further orders from the Supreme Court. The petitioner was directed to file a statutory appeal before the Appellate Authority/Commissioner of GST & Central Excise (Appeals) within 30 days. Addi

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Petitioners to get refund on differential GST paid for pre-GST works contracts/composite supplies.
Case-Laws
GST
The High Court directed the respondents to refund the differential GST amount, being the difference between GST and VAT, paid by the petitioner for each works contract/composite supply executed before July 1, 2017. The Court held that payments received by the petitioners pre-GST for works executed before July 1, 2017, are assessable under the KVAT tax regime, either under the

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Tax Demand on Service Aspect of Composite Supply Violates CGST Act, Certain Demands Dropped, Petitioner May Appeal Remaining Issues.
Case-Laws
GST
The High Court held that the demand for tax on the service aspect of a composite supply involving import of goods and related services like transportation and insurance is in violation of Section 2(30) read with Section 8 of the CGST Act, following the Supreme Court's decision in Union of India Vs. M/s.Mohit Minerals Pvt. Ltd. Consequently, t

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Appeal Required for IGST Refund and Input Tax Credit Dispute; Notification No. 09/2023 Validity Challenged.
Case-Laws
GST
Wrongful availment and passing on of input tax credit, wrongful availment of IGST refund under Advance Authorisation scheme. Constitutional validity of Notification No. 09/2023-Central Tax dated 31.03.2023 questioned, whether ultra-vires the CGST Act provisions. Held that the challenged order is dated 21.02.2024, and the challenge is on merits. Appeal lies before the

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Court Orders Refund of Unutilized Input Tax Credit with Interest to be Processed Within 12 Weeks.
Case-Laws
GST
The petitioner had unutilized Input Tax Credit (ITC) of Rs.2,42,15,906/- under the VAT Act for the period from 1st April 2017 to 30th June 2017, which was carried forward to the GST regime by filing Form GST TRAN 1. Subsequently, the petitioner reversed the ITC in the Electronic Credit Ledger by filing Form DRC-03. The High Court, relying on its previous decision in R. N. Labo

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =