Goods and Services Tax

Deposits in Electronic Cash Ledger Valid for GST Liability Under Section 49 Despite Liquidation Proceedings
Case-Laws
GST
The HC held that the petitioner's deposits in the Electronic Cash Ledger for the GST liability from April to December 2019 are valid and must be appropriated to discharge the tax liability despite the petitioner's failure to file returns due to liquidation proceedings. The Court noted that the petitioner transferred the requisite amounts timely under Section 49 of the GST enactments. The Board's subsequent clarification, which suggested fresh registration and refund applications for liquidators, was deemed a procedural facilitation and not a substantive bar to appropriation of already paid amounts. Consequently, the impugned order denying appropriation was quashed, and the petition was allowed, granting relief to the petitioner by recognizing the Electronic Cash Ledger payments as sufficient discharge of GST liability with interest and penalty.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Notification No.56/2023 declared illegal for non-compliance with Section 168A CGST Act procedural rules
Case-Laws
GST
The HC declared Notification No.56/2023 dated 28.12.2023 as vitiated and illegal due to non-compliance with mandatory procedural conditions under Section 168A of the CGST Act, 2017, including the absence of the GST Council's recommendation. The Court relied on prior precedent addressing jurisdictional errors, violation of natural justice, and errors apparent on the record, directing reassessment by the authorities. Consequently, all impugned orders based on the invalid notification were set aside. The writ petition was disposed of accordingly.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

51-Day Delay in Appeal Filing Condoned Due to Genuine Reasons, Appeal Restored with Rs. 5,000 Payment Condition
Case-Laws
GST
The HC condoned a 51-day delay in filing the appeal, finding the petitioner's reasons-time taken to gather supporting documents, reconcile records, and obtain legal advice-genuine and sufficient. The appeal was restored before the 2nd respondent subject to the petitioner paying Rs. 5,000 to the specified government medical institution within two weeks of receiving the order. The petition was disposed of accordingly.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

West Bengal records 12 pc YoY growth in GST collection for July: Mamata
GST
Dated:- 5-8-2025
PTI
Kolkata, Aug 5 (PTI) West Bengal has registered a 12 per cent year-on-year growth in gross Goods and Services Tax (GST) collections for July 2025, Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee said on Monday, citing provisional figures released by the Centre.
In a post on X, Banerjee said the state collected Rs 5,895 crore in GST revenue last month, up from Rs 5,257 crore in July 2024.
“Glad to share

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Petitioner entitled to 6% statutory interest under Section 56 CGST Act on refund after 60 days delay
Case-Laws
GST
The HC held that the petitioner is entitled to statutory interest at 6% per annum on the refund amount, commencing from the day after the expiry of sixty days from the receipt of the refund application until the refund is credited. This aligns with the precedent set by the Coordinate Bench, confirming that interest accrues under Section 56 of the CGST Act, 2017. The Court directed the respondent to pay the interest within two months. The petition was disposed of accordingly.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST ITC Denied and Registration Cancelled Due to Non-Genuine Supplier Under Section 16(2)(c), Penalty Quashed
Case-Laws
GST
The HC upheld the disallowance of input tax credit (ITC) and cancellation of GST registration against the petitioner, finding that the supplier was a non-genuine dealer who failed to discharge tax liability under section 16(2)(c) of the GST Act. The petitioner failed to produce documentary evidence supporting the genuineness of supplies. Unlike precedents where revenue failed to inquire with suppliers, the respondent here conducted an inquiry confirming non-payment of tax by the supplier, justifying reversal of ITC by the petitioner. However, the penalty imposed was set aside due to the absence of mandatory prior intimation in Form GST DRC-01A under section 73. Consequently, the impugned order was modified to quash the penalty, while affirming the reversal of ITC and cancellation of registration. The appeal was disposed of accordingly.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

HC upholds fraud findings on ITC misuse under multiple years, denies cross-examination impact, allows extended appeal deadline
Case-Laws
GST
The HC upheld the Adjudicating Authority's findings of fraudulent availment and further passing on of ITC based on invoices from non-existent entities, rejecting the petitioner's replies as insufficient to contest the investigation. The Court emphasized that establishing fraudulent ITC utilization often requires analysis across multiple financial years to reveal consistent patterns of bogus transactions. It held that the non-grant of cross-examination caused no prejudice, as all relied-upon documents were recovered from the petitioner's premises, who was aware of the actual status of the parties involved. The HC declined to reappraise factual findings in writ jurisdiction, noting its limited scope under Articles 226 and 227. The petitioner was granted an extended period until 31 August 2025 to file a time-barred appeal with requisite pre-deposit, which will be heard on merits if filed within the stipulated time. The petition was disposed of accordingly.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Petition Challenging GST Registration Cancellation Allowed Despite Alternative Remedies Under Section 30
Case-Laws
GST
The HC held that the petition challenging the cancellation of GST registration is maintainable despite the availability of an alternative remedy, given the nascent stage of the Act and the complexities faced by a layperson. The Court emphasized that cancellation directly impacts the petitioner's livelihood and State revenue, noting the constitutional right to carry on business subject to statutory compliance. The delay in invoking Section 30 of the Act was condoned in the interest of justice. The petitioner was granted three weeks to file an application under Section 30 along with all pending returns up to the cancellation date. The department is directed to consider and dispose of the application within three weeks thereafter. The petition was disposed of accordingly.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Improper Service of Show Cause Notices Violates Natural Justice, Orders Set Aside Under Rule of Fair Hearing
Case-Laws
GST
The HC held that the Show Cause Notices (SCNs) dated 23rd September, 2023 and 4th December, 2023 were not properly served as they were uploaded only on the 'Additional Notices Tab' and were inaccessible to the Petitioner, violating principles of natural justice. Although the SCN dated 27th May, 2024 was properly uploaded, the Petitioner missed it. The impugned orders passed without affording the Petitioner an opportunity to be heard were set aside. The matter was remanded to the Adjudicating Authority for fresh adjudication on merits. The Petitioner was granted time until 31st August, 2025, to file replies to the SCNs. The petition was accordingly disposed of.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Petition Challenging GST Registration Cancellation Dismissed for Dilatory Conduct Under Writ Jurisdiction
Case-Laws
GST
The HC dismissed the petition challenging the cancellation of the petitioner's GST registration and the associated show cause notice, finding the petitioner's conduct to be dilatory and non-compliant. The court held that there was no basis for interference under its writ jurisdiction. Consequently, the petition was disposed of without restoring the GST registration. The petitioner was advised that it remains at liberty to apply for a fresh GST registration if desired.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Attorney-client privilege protects advocates from search and seizure without prima facie evidence under applicable rules
Case-Laws
GST
The HC emphasized the inviolability of attorney-client privilege, holding that search and seizure of an advocate's office, including the CPU and documents, cannot be conducted without prima facie evidence implicating the advocate beyond mere representation. The Court ruled that absent material indicating the advocate's personal involvement in alleged illegal activity, such actions amount to harassment and are impermissible. The GST Department was directed to file an affidavit substantiating its grounds for the search by the next hearing date, with the matter adjourned for further consideration.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Petition Dismissed on Penalty Under Section 122(1)(ii) CGST Act for Fraudulent GST Registration Use
Case-Laws
GST
The HC dismissed the petition challenging the levy of penalty under Section 122(1)(ii) of the CGST Act, 2017, and related provisions, concerning fraudulent use of a second GST registration. The court found contradictions in the petitioner's claim of non-use of the second registration and noted the petitioner's failure to actively pursue the investigation since 2019. The petition was held to be premature for writ relief due to the necessity of factual inquiry and the expiry of the limitation period under Section 107 of the CGST Act, 2017. The court emphasized the petitioner's responsibility to safeguard its identity and held that the impugned order did not merit interference. The petitioner was directed to avail statutory remedies by filing an appeal within the prescribed time with the requisite pre-deposit.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

CGST Delhi South Commissionerate busts a racket that fraudulently availed Input Tax Credit (ITC) worth Rs.47.12 crore in iron one arrested
GST
Dated:- 4-8-2025

The Anti-Evasion Branch of CGST Delhi South Commissionerate has unearthed a large-scale fraudulently availed Input Tax Credit (ITC) racket involving a Naraina-based taxpayer engaged in trading of iron and steel items. The case involves fraudulent availment and passing on of ITC totaling Rs.47.12 crore, based on bogus invoices against a taxable value of approximately Rs.261 crore, without any actual supply of goods.
Acting on specific intelligence developed by the Anti-Evasion wing, an investigation was initiated into a suspicious supply chain. The inquiry revealed that

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Mandatory 60-Day Limit Under Section 54(7) WBGST Act Crucial for Refund Orders; Timelines and Jurisdiction Strictly Enforced
Case-Laws
GST
The HC held that the 60-day time limit under Section 54(7) of the WBGST Act, 2017 for passing an order on a refund application is mandatory and any non-compliance vitiates the order passed under Section 54(5). The PO must consider the applicant's reply and provide an opportunity of hearing within this period. The scrutiny and acknowledgment of the refund application must be completed within 15 days as per Rule 90(2). The rejection of the refund claim by the Assistant Commissioner and Appellate Authority was held unlawful as they exceeded their jurisdiction by questioning receipt of goods by the importer, which is irrelevant; the refund is contingent solely on payment of duties, evidenced by customs documents. The HC found the impugned orders and judgment legally flawed, set aside the judgment, and allowed the intra-court appeal due to the authorities' failure to adhere to mandatory timelines and exceed their statutory mandate.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Limitation for Tax Refund Claims Starts from IGST Deposit Date Under Section 77 and Rule 19(1A)
Case-Laws
GST
The HC held that the limitation period for claiming a refund of excess taxes paid under Section 77 of the BGST/CGST Act, 2017, read with Section 19 of the IGST Act and Rule 19(1A), commences from the date of deposit of the tax under the IGST Act, not from the date of SGST and CGST deposit. The Respondent authority erred in computing limitation from January 2018, rendering the statutory provisions and clarificatory Circular ineffective. The Court recognized the benevolent extension of limitation provided by the Circular for wrongful tax deposits. Consequently, the impugned order rejecting the refund application was declared legally unsustainable and set aside. The petitioner's application for refund was allowed.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Writ Petition Not Maintainable When Alternative Remedy Exists Under Section 107 of the Act of 2017
Case-Laws
GST
The HC held that the writ petition was not maintainable due to the availability of an alternative remedy under Section 107 of the Act of 2017. The petitioners' grievance, despite alleged violation of natural justice by the CGST authority for non-supply of relevant documents, must be addressed through the statutory appeal mechanism. The court emphasized that it will not entertain a writ petition when an efficacious and speedy remedy exists under the statute. The time elapsed from filing the writ petition to disposal shall be excluded for the purpose of condoning any delay in filing the appeal before the Appellate Authority. The petition was accordingly disposed of, reinforcing the principle that extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 should not override specific appeal provisions.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Section 6(2)(b) bars multiple tax proceedings on the same matter under WBGST/CGST Act, 2017 (2)(b)
Case-Laws
GST
The HC held that proceedings under Section 6(2)(b) of the WBGST/CGST Act, 2017 bar initiation of multiple proceedings on the same subject matter by different authorities. The petitioner faced three separate proceedings by State authorities for tax periods 2018-2019, 2019-2020, and 2020-2021 under Section 73, addressing claims of exempted supply and alleged suppression of facts. Central authorities also initiated proceedings for 2018-2022 based on audit observations regarding suppression of taxable value and unreconciled turnover. The Court found no scope for further audit under Section 65, noting that notices under Section 73 were already issued under Section 65(7). Since the issues had been adjudicated by competent authorities, the HC allowed the petition, restraining any additional proceedings on the same subject matter.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

One-Day Delay in Filing Appeal Against Ex Parte Order Condoned Due to Holiday Falling on Deadline
Case-Laws
GST
The HC condoned a one-day delay in filing an appeal against an ex parte assessment order, which was originally due on a Sunday, a public holiday. The petitioner filed the appeal the following day, exceeding the prescribed period by one day. The respondent rejected the appeal for being time-barred. The HC found the reason for the delay genuine and held that the delay warranted condonation. Consequently, the rejection order was set aside, and the delay was formally condoned, allowing the appeal to proceed. The petition was disposed accordingly.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Loading and Transport Services to SEZ Units Are Zero-Rated Under Section 16(1)(b) of IGST Act, 2017
Case-Laws
GST
The AAR held that services consisting of loading, transporting, stacking, and rack loading of bauxite provided to a SEZ unit qualify as cargo handling services integral to authorized operations. Such services supplied to a SEZ developer or unit are regarded as inter-state supplies and thereby classified as zero-rated supplies under Section 16(1)(b) of the IGST Act, 2017. Consequently, the service provider is entitled to all benefits and conditions applicable to zero-rated supplies. The ruling confirms that these services are not subject to tax and fall within the scope of authorized operations permitted by the Department of Commerce, affirming their exemption status under GST law.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST on Rice and Wheat Flour Now Based on Packaging Compliance, Not Brand Name Status
Case-Laws
GST
The AAR held that post 18 July 2022, the distinction between “Registered Brand Name” and “Brand Name” is abolished for GST purposes. Consequently, GST liability on commodities such as rice and wheat flour (atta), whether pre-packaged and labeled or not, must be determined solely based on compliance with the Legal Metrological Act regarding pre-packaging and labeling, irrespective of weight. The GST rate applicable to these commodities shall follow the notifications governing Central Tax (Rate), specifically Notification Nos. 01/2017, 27/2017, 06/2022, and 01/2025, as amended. The applicant's reliance on brand name status for exemption is therefore irrelevant, and GST applicability is contingent upon packaging and labeling criteria under the Legal Metrological Act.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Operations with permanent service setup and stored goods qualify as fixed establishment under GST Section 2(71)
Case-Laws
GST
The AAR held that the applicant's operations in Odisha, involving repair and maintenance services through Field Service Engineers and storage of spare parts and tool kits, constitute a fixed establishment rather than a temporary place. Given the permanence of the applicant's presence and storage of goods at the Odisha location for fulfilling maintenance contracts, the site qualifies as a fixed establishment under GST law. Consequently, the applicant is required to obtain GST registration in Odisha, as the place of supply of services is deemed to be the fixed establishment in that state, pursuant to the definition of “location of the supplier of services” under Section 2(71). This ruling mandates compliance with GST registration and tax obligations in Odisha for services rendered from the fixed establishment there.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Applicant's supply not a “pure service” under Notification 12/2017 due to mixed goods and service charges
Case-Laws
GST
The AAR held that the applicant's supply does not constitute a “pure service” as defined under Notification No. 12/2017-Central Tax (Rate) dated 28.06.2017, since the consideration received included both the procurement value of goods and service charges without segregation. The applicant failed to satisfy clause (d) of the relevant explanation, which requires distinct treatment of procurement costs separate from service charges to qualify as a pure agent. Consequently, the supply cannot be classified as a pure service, rendering the applicant ineligible for the exemption under Sl. No. 3 of the said notification. The ruling confirms that when goods and services are bundled without clear separation of values, the exemption for pure services does not apply.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ITC Denied on Electricity for Township Maintenance and Exempt DCS Supplies Before 5-7-2022 Under Section 16(1) CGST Act
Case-Laws
GST
The HC held that the petitioner is not entitled to ITC on electricity consumed for township maintenance, as such consumption is not in the course or furtherance of business under Section 16(1) of the CGST Act. ITC on exempt supply of DCS prior to 5-7-2022 was disallowed, as the sale of DCS was exempt and excluded from ITC eligibility. The amendment dated 5-7-2022, which excluded DCS from the aggregate value of exempt supplies, was held to be clarificatory in scope but not retrospective and thus does not entitle the petitioner to ITC before that date. ITC is a concession granted by statute and not a substantive right. Consequently, the appeals were dismissed, and the writ petitions were denied, affirming that the petitioner cannot claim ITC on township electricity consumption or on exempt DCS supplies before the amendment's effective date.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Show Cause Notice to Deceased Proprietor Invalid Under Section 93; Notice Must Go to Legal Representative
Case-Laws
GST
The HC held that issuance of a show cause notice (SCN) to a deceased proprietor of a firm is impermissible, as section 93 contemplates liability only when the business continues or is discontinued post-death, and mandates issuance of notice to the legal representative. The provision does not authorize determination or recovery against a deceased individual. In the present case, since the SCN and determination were issued against the deceased without involving the legal representative, the actions were invalid. Consequently, the petition was allowed, and the determination against the deceased proprietor was set aside.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Penalty upheld under Section 129(3) CGST Act for false E-Way Bill loading location despite no tax evasion intent
Case-Laws
GST
The HC dismissed the petition challenging the levy of penalty under section 129(3) of the CGST Act, 2017, for violation of Rule 138 of the GST Rules, 2017. The petitioner's claim of no intent to evade tax was rejected due to discrepancies between the declared E-Way Bill loading point and the actual GPS-verified loading location. The vehicle's prolonged stay at Rupnarayanpur confirmed the goods were loaded contrary to the declared dispatch place. Although the petitioner paid the penalty and secured release of goods without protest, this did not constitute waiver of rights. The court found the adjudicating authority's material against the petitioner sufficient and held the petition as meritless and an afterthought, dismissing it in limine.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =