Goods and Services Tax

GST Exemption on Insurance Premium Sharing and Reinsurance Services Under Schedule III Amendment
Circulars
GST – States
The circular regularizes GST payment on two insurance-related transactions from July 1, 2017 to October 31, 2024 on an “as is where is” basis. Effective November 1, 2024, Schedule III of the CGST Act was amended to exclude: (1) premium apportionment by lead insurers to co-insurers, provided the lead insurer pays GST on the entire premium; and (2) services by insurers to reinsurers where ceding/reinsurance commission is deducted from reinsurance premium, provided the reinsurer pays GST on the gross reinsurance premium inclusive of commission. This implementation follows recommendations from the 53rd GST Council meeting and applies uniformly across Goa's GST framework.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Input Tax Credit Refund for Export Services Without Tax Payment Awaits Authority Review
Case-Laws
GST
The HC disposed of a petition concerning refund of Input Tax Credit (ITC) for export of services without tax payment. The petitioner committed to furnish any required materials without delay when requested. The Court expressed confidence that authorities would examine the matter diligently and pass appropriate orders within the timeframe indicated by respondent's counsel. The application was accordingly disposed of without specific directives, relying on the authorities to process the ITC refund claim appropriately.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Denial of Input Tax Credit Overturned as Section 16(5) Extends Time Limit for Claims from FY 2017-18 to 2020-21
Case-Laws
GST
The HC set aside the denial of Input Tax Credit (ITC) for FY 2018-19 that was based on Section 16(4) of CGST/SGST Act. The Court recognized that Section 16(5) extended the time limit for claiming ITC for FYs 2017-18 to 2020-21 until November 30, 2021. The impugned order failed to consider this provision. The HC directed the competent authority to reconsider the petitioner's claim within three months, specifically accounting for Section 16(5) provisions and after providing the petitioner an opportunity of hearing.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Adjudication Order Upheld After Petitioner Repeatedly Failed to Respond Despite Multiple Hearing Notices Sent by Post and Email
Case-Laws
GST
The HC dismissed an application seeking to quash a show-cause notice and adjudication order. The Court found that despite multiple hearing notices sent both by post and email, the petitioner failed to appear before the adjudicating authority. The Court determined that the show-cause notice was sufficiently detailed, setting out all necessary particulars requiring response. Although the petitioner claimed violation of natural justice principles by not being afforded proper opportunity to be heard, the Court declined to exercise discretion to grant any special opportunity due to the petitioner's serious laches in responding to the hearing notices.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Authorities Directed to Consider GST Non-Payment Allegations and Issue Speaking Order Within Two Weeks
Case-Laws
GST
The HC directed respondent No. 1 to consider the petitioner's representations regarding non-payment of GST and other alleged offenses by respondent No. 2. A speaking order must be issued within two weeks, with discretion given to respondent No. 1 to hear both parties before making the determination. The petition was allowed, though the Court did not directly order registration of an FIR as requested, instead mandating proper consideration of the petitioner's complaints through appropriate administrative channels with a time-bound resolution requirement.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Revenue Department's Order Set Aside: Petitioner Must Deposit 25% of Disputed Tax Amount Within Four Weeks
Case-Laws
GST
The HC set aside the impugned order due to violation of natural justice principles, specifically non-service of notices and orders that prevented the petitioner from participating in adjudication proceedings. The petitioner demonstrated willingness to pay 25% of the disputed tax amount. The Court allowed the petition with the condition that the petitioner must deposit 25% of the disputed taxes within four weeks from receipt of the order copy. This resolution balances procedural fairness with the petitioner's tax obligations while providing an opportunity for proper adjudication.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Assignment of Long-Term Leasehold Rights Not Subject to GST Under Section 9 of CGST Act
Case-Laws
GST
The HC quashed and set aside the show cause notice, ruling that assignment of long-term leasehold rights does not attract GST. Following Gujarat Chamber of Commerce precedent, the court determined that such assignment constitutes a transfer of benefits arising from immovable property rather than a taxable supply under the CGST Act. The deed of assignment represents a sale/transfer of leasehold rights for valuable consideration, placing the assignee in the position of lessee. As this transaction falls outside the scope of Section 7(1)(a) read with Schedule II Clause 5(b) and Schedule III Clause 5, it is not subject to GST under Section 9 of the Act.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST Proceedings Under Section 73 Not Time-Barred When Completed Before December 31 Deadline
Case-Laws
GST
The HC examined whether proceedings under Section 73 of the U.P. GST Act, 2017 were time-barred. The proceedings commenced on 20.09.2023 via show cause notice with a final order issued on 15.12.2023. Applying the precedent established in M/s A.V. Pharma vs. State of U.P. & Ors., the Court determined that such orders could only be passed until 31.12.2023, even with time extensions. Since the proceedings were completed within this timeframe (15.12.2023), they were not time-barred. However, the Court ultimately quashed the impugned orders and proceedings, allowing the petition on other undisclosed grounds.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Taxpayer Wins as Assessment Order Set Aside Due to Improper Service of Notice Under Section 169(1) of CGST Act
Case-Laws
GST
The HC set aside the impugned assessment order dated 28.08.2024 for AY 2019-2020 and consequential proceedings, applying precedent from MR. SAHULHAMEED case which established that assessees are entitled to service of notice under the modes prescribed in clauses (a), (b), and (c) of Section 169(1) of CGST Act, 2017. The petitioner was directed to submit a reply to the show cause notice within two weeks, after which respondent must provide a hearing opportunity before passing orders on merits. Any bank attachment made was ordered to be released. The petition was allowed.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Agricultural Produce Market Cess Collection Ruled Unconstitutional After GST Implementation Under CGST and AGST Acts 2017
Case-Laws
GST
The HC ruled that collection of cess by respondent authorities under the Assam Agricultural Produce Market Act, 1972 post-GST implementation was unconstitutional and ultra vires to the provisions of the CGST Act, 2017 and AGST Act, 2017. Following the precedent established in M/s. Bhatter Traders, which involved pari materia issues, the Court disposed of the writ petition in favor of the petitioner. The judgment effectively invalidates the respondent authorities' power to levy and collect such cess in the GST regime, rendering their actions unlawful and establishing grounds for the petitioner's refund claim.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Blocking of Electronic Credit Ledger Quashed: Rule 86A Procedural Requirements Not Met in GST Case
Case-Laws
GST
The HC quashed the order blocking the petitioner's Electronic Credit Ledger under Rule 86A of KGST/CGST Rules. The Court found multiple procedural deficiencies: no pre-decisional hearing was provided to the petitioner; the order lacked independent “reasons to believe” as required by law; and the authority impermissibly relied on borrowed satisfaction from enforcement reports. Following K-9-ENTERPRISES precedent, the Court held that mandatory prerequisites under Rule 86A were not fulfilled. The respondents were directed to immediately unblock the petitioner's Electronic Credit Ledger to enable filing of returns. The petition was allowed.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

West Bengal GST Amendment Extends ITC Claim Deadline to November 30, 2021 for FY 2017-18 to 2020-21
Circulars
GST – States
The WBGST Act was amended to retrospectively extend the time limit for claiming input tax credit for financial years 2017-18 through 2020-21 until November 30, 2021, and to establish special provisions for taxpayers whose registration was cancelled and subsequently revoked. The DCT clarified implementation procedures across various scenarios: ongoing investigations, pending demand notices, cases under adjudication, appellate proceedings, and revision proceedings. Taxpayers with final orders confirming demands for improper ITC claims may apply for rectification within six months from October 8, 2024. While no refund is available for tax already paid or ITC reversed due to these amendments, pre-deposits made during appeals are refundable if decided favorably.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST Interest and Penalty Waiver Scheme Offers Relief for 2017-20 Tax Demands if Paid by March 2025
Circulars
GST – States
The WBGST Act amendment provides a waiver scheme for interest and penalties on tax demands for FY 2017-18 to 2019-20. Taxpayers must pay the full tax amount by March 31, 2025 to qualify. For cases where ITC was denied solely due to Section 16(4) violations but now allowed under retrospectively inserted Sections 16(5) and 16(6), taxpayers may deduct such amounts from their payment. Applications must be filed in Form GST SPL-01 or SPL-02 depending on case status. The proper officer must issue an order within prescribed time limits or the application is deemed approved. No appeal lies against approval orders, though rejection orders can be appealed. The scheme covers IGST and Compensation Cess but excludes import IGST under Customs Act.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST Clarification: Pepper at 5%, Agriculturists Exempt, Popcorn Rates Vary, AAC Blocks at 12%
Circulars
GST – States
The CBIC circular, adopted by Maharashtra State Tax, clarifies several GST classification issues. Pepper of genus Piper attracts 5% GST, with agriculturists exempt from registration when supplying dried pepper from their cultivations. Similarly, agriculturists supplying raisins are exempt from GST registration. Ready-to-eat popcorn with salt and spices attracts 5% GST (unpackaged) or 12% GST (packaged/labeled), while caramel popcorn attracts 18% GST. Past classifications until February 14, 2025 are regularized on an “as is where is” basis. Autoclaved aerated concrete blocks with over 50% fly ash content attract 12% GST. The amended compensation cess for utility vehicles with specific engine capacity, length, and ground clearance applies from July 26, 2023.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Late Fee Under GST Section 47(2) Applies to Incomplete Annual Returns Without GSTR-9C for High-Turnover Businesses
Circulars
GST – States
The CBIC clarified that late fee under section 47(2) of the CGST Act applies to delayed filing of complete annual returns under section 44, which includes both FORM GSTR-9 and GSTR-9C (where required). Late fee is calculated from the due date until the complete return is furnished. For taxpayers with aggregate turnover exceeding the threshold (5 crore post-August 2021), annual return filing is incomplete without GSTR-9C. Per Notification No. 08/2025-Central Tax, excess late fee for financial years up to FY 2022-23 is waived if GSTR-9C is filed by March 31, 2025, with no additional fee beyond what was payable up to the GSTR-9 filing date. No refunds are available for late fees already paid.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Maharashtra State Tax Commissioner Adopts CBIC Circular 245/02/2025-GST Clarifying Payment Aggregator Exemptions and Penal Charges
Circulars
GST – States
The Commissioner of State Tax, Maharashtra has adopted CBIC Circular No. 245/02/2025-GST dated January 28, 2025, making it applicable to the MGST Act, 2017. The circular provides several GST clarifications: penal charges levied by Regulated Entities per RBI directives are not subject to GST; Payment Aggregators qualify for GST exemption under Sl. No. 34 of notification No. 12/2017-CTR; GST payments are regularized for research services by Government Entities (2017-2024) and skilling services by NSDC-approved Training Partners (2024-2025); facility management services to MCD are GST-taxable; DDA is not a local authority under GST law; and various other GST regularizations for composition levy taxpayers and electricity utilities.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST Registration Requires Applicants to Disclose All Business Premises, Automatic Registration Not Mandated Under Section 107
Case-Laws
GST
The HC dismissed the petition challenging a GST demand, finding the petitioner's claim that the Partnership Deed's reference to a fourth business site should have prompted automatic registration by authorities to be baseless. The court held that applicants bear responsibility to disclose all business premises for GST registration, and the petitioner had failed to register the fourth site for over six years. The court noted that the petitioner had not pursued the available statutory remedy of appeal under Section 107 of the GST Act, instead filing this petition over a year after the impugned order. The HC concluded no grounds existed to invoke jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution, as the challenge primarily involved factual determinations properly addressed through statutory appeals.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Jurisdictional Defects in CGST Notice Under Section 74 Lead to Stay Order as Rule 142 Ignored
Case-Laws
GST
The HC stayed a common final order issued during pending litigation, finding prima facie merit in petitioners' challenges. The court determined that the original show cause notice under CGST Act s.74 was issued without jurisdiction for failing to comply with mandatory provisions of Rule 142 of CGST Rules. Applying the maxim “sublato fundamento cadit opus,” the court held that when the foundation of proceedings is defective, all subsequent actions and orders automatically fail. Additionally, the denial of petitioners' right to cross-examine witnesses whose testimony was relied upon by respondents constituted a violation of natural justice principles. The court admitted the petitions for final hearing and stayed the operation of the impugned order to prevent irreparable harm to petitioners.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Limitation Period for GST Refund Claims Cannot Be Altered by Circulars or Retrospective Rule Amendments
Case-Laws
GST
The HC dismissed a petition seeking to extend the benefit of the proviso to Rule 90(3) of CGST Rules to exclude days between filing refund claims and issuance of deficiency memos for limitation calculation. The court determined that the petitioner's refund claims for zero-rated supplies (exports) made during July-September 2017 were filed within the statutory limitation period under Section 54 of CGST Act. The court held that Circular No.125/44/2019 could not impose a fresh limitation period contrary to statutory provisions, and the 2021 amendment to Rule 90(3) could not be given retrospective effect. The amendment to Explanation 2(e) to Section 54 was deemed inapplicable as the petitioner's claims predated this amendment.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Circular Trading Adjudication Must Include All Five Assessees; Petitioner's Writ Petition Restored
Case-Laws
GST
The HC recalled its earlier order and restored the writ petition, acknowledging that the petitioner should not be excluded from proceedings involving circular trading adjudication. The court recognized that circular trading issues must be decided with all five assessees participating collectively. The petitioner sought restoration to challenge the adjudicating authority's final order alongside four other assessees. The court determined that changed circumstances warranted restoration of the petition to its original number (8015/2024), thereby allowing the petitioner to join the collective proceedings. The review petition was accordingly disposed of, with the court's 17.12.2024 order being formally recalled.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST Fraud Case: Court Rejects FIR Quashment Despite Section 132(6) CGST Act Protection Claim
Case-Laws
GST
The HC dismissed a petition seeking quashment of an FIR filed under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 & 120-B IPC related to tax fraud. While the petitioner argued protection under Section 132(6) of CGST Act, the court distinguished that the prosecution was for IPC offenses, not CGST violations. The petitioner allegedly fabricated tax invoices through “Dabang Duniya” publication, falsely claiming sales of 100,000 copies daily (versus actual 5,000-8,000) to facilitate GST evasion of approximately 500 crore. The court rejected both the quashment request and the constitutional challenge to Section 132(6), finding no grounds to interfere with the ongoing investigation.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Show-Cause Notice Under CGST Act Section 73 Quashed: Parallel Proceedings For Same Transaction Creates Legal Uncertainty
Case-Laws
GST
The HC quashed a show-cause notice issued under s.73 of the CGST Act regarding irregularities in transitional credit claimed via TRAN-1. Relying on Usha Martin Limited vs. Additional Commissioner precedent, the court determined that despite the general rule of exhausting statutory remedies before seeking judicial review, writ petitions are maintainable when challenging actions wholly without jurisdiction. The court examined s.174 of the CGST Act and relevant constitutional provisions, concluding that parallel proceedings under both pre-GST and GST regimes for the same transaction would create legal uncertainty. The court held that the impugned show-cause notice was issued without jurisdiction and accordingly allowed the petition.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST Registration Cancellation Quashed: Authorities Failed to Consider Medical Reasons and Payment of Dues
Case-Laws
GST
The HC quashed the order cancelling petitioner's GST registration for failure to file returns for six months. The Court found that authorities failed to consider the petitioner's contentions regarding payment of dues and medical reasons for delay, constituting a violation of natural justice principles. Following precedent established in Aggarwal Dyeing and Printing, which emphasized scrupulous adherence to procedural aspects, the matter was remanded to the Assessing Officer at the show cause notice stage. The AO must conduct fresh adjudication within twelve weeks, providing the petitioner an opportunity of hearing and issuing a reasoned order thereafter.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST Registration Cancellation Cannot Be Retrospective Without Prior Notice in Show Cause Notice
Case-Laws
GST
The HC held that the retrospective cancellation of petitioner's GST registration was invalid due to procedural defects in the Show Cause Notice. The original SCN dated September 19, 2024, contained no disclosure of intent to cancel registration retrospectively, nor provided supporting reasons for such action. This failure to place the petitioner on prior notice violated principles of natural justice. The Court allowed the writ petition, modifying the impugned order to stipulate that the cancellation would take effect from the date of the SCN itself rather than retrospectively, thereby protecting the petitioner from backdated consequences while maintaining the validity of the cancellation from the notice date forward.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST Jurisdictional Boundaries Redefined for Seven Key Locations Under Section 3 of CGST Act
Notifications
GST
The Central Government amended Notification No. 02/2017-Central Tax regarding jurisdictional boundaries of CGST officers. The amendments, exercised under section 3 read with section 5 of CGST Act and section 3 of IGST Act, redefine territorial jurisdictions for seven key locations: Alwar, Chennai Outer, Jaipur, Jodhpur, Madurai, Tiruchirapalli, and Udaipur. The notification specifically restructures district allocations within these jurisdictions, particularly affecting administrative boundaries in Rajasthan and Tamil Nadu. For Madurai, the amendment also clarifies jurisdiction over territorial waters and underlying seabed. The changes represent a significant administrative reorganization of GST enforcement territories.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =