Goods and Services Tax

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

= = = = = = = =

Advisory for Biometric-Based Aadhaar Authentication and Document Verification for GST Registration Applicants of Uttar Pradesh
GST
Dated:- 17-3-2025

Dear Taxpayers,
This is to inform taxpayers about recent developments concerning the application process for GST registration. It is advised to keep the following key points in mind during the registration process.
1. Rule 8 of the CGST Rules, 2017 has been amended to provide that an applicant can be identified on the common portal, based on data analysis and risk parameters for Biometric-based Aadhaar Authentication and taking a photograph of the applicant along with the verification of the original copy of the documents uploaded with the application.
2. The above-said fu

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

e/he can proceed with the application as per the existing process.
5. However, if the applicant receives the link as mentioned in point 3(b), she/he will be required to book the appointment to visit the designated GSK, using the link provided in the e-mail.
6.  The feature of booking an appointment to visit a designated GSK is being enabled for the applicants of Uttar Pradesh and the applicants can book slots from 18/03/2025.
7.  After booking the appointment, the applicant gets the confirmation of appointment through e-mail (the appointment confirmation e-mail), she/he will be able to visit the designated GSK as per the chosen schedule.
8.  At the time of the visit of GSK, the applicant is required to carry the foll

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Assessment Order Set Aside Due to Missing Document Identification Number (DIN) Requirement Under CBIC Circular No.128/47/2019-GST
Case-Laws
GST
The HC set aside the assessment order due to the absence of a Document Identification Number (DIN), ruling it non-est and invalid. Following precedents established in Pradeep Goyal v. Union of India and M/s. Cluster Enterprises v. The Deputy Assistant Commissioner, along with CBIC Circular No.128/47/2019-GST, the court determined that proceedings lacking a DIN number cannot be sustained. The petition was disposed of with the impugned proceedings dated 18.07.2023 set aside, granting liberty to the respondent to conduct fresh assessment after proper notice and assigning a DIN number to the order.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Bus Services Paid Directly by Students Not Exempt from 5% GST Under SAC 9964 Transport Classification
Case-Laws
GST
The AAR determined that transportation services provided to students and staff could not be considered as services to the educational institution since the applicant received payment directly from students rather than the school, as evidenced by the Profit and Loss Account showing only “Bus Fees Receipt” from students with no financial transactions with the school. Consequently, these services are classified as “Transport of passenger by any motor vehicle” under SAC 9964, attracting 5% GST without ITC per Notification No. 11/2017 as amended. The exemption under Serial No. 66 of Notification No. 12/2017-Central Tax (Rate) is inapplicable as it requires services be provided to an educational institution, not directly to students.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Minor Clerical Error in GSTN Documentation Cannot Be Grounds for Denying Input Tax Credit Under Section 16(2)(aa)
Case-Laws
GST
HC held that a minor clerical error in GST documentation – specifically, the mention of petitioner's Bombay office GSTN instead of Delhi office GSTN on invoices – cannot be grounds for denying Input Tax Credit under Section 16(2)(aa) of CGST Act, 2017. The court noted that petitioner's name was correctly mentioned on invoices and no other entity had claimed the ITC on these purchases. The impugned Order dated June 28, 2024 was set aside, allowing petitioner to avail the ITC, as denying credit for such a minor error would cause substantial financial loss. Petition partly allowed.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST Appeal Dismissed: 95-Day Delay Beyond Statutory Limit of One Month Cannot Be Condoned Under Section 107(4)
Case-Laws
GST
The HC dismissed a petition challenging the Appellate Authority's refusal to condone a 95-day delay in filing a GST appeal. Under Section 107(1) of GST law, appeals must be filed within three months from communication of the order, with Section 107(4) allowing the Authority to condone delays only up to an additional one month. The Court affirmed that the Limitation Act does not apply to GST appeals, citing Chintels India Limited v. Bhayana Builders Private Limited where the SC held delays beyond 120 days cannot be condoned. Since the petitioner failed to disclose when the order was communicated, limitation was counted from the order date (21.07.2023), and neither the Appellate Authority nor the HC had statutory power to condone delays exceeding one month.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Tax Intimation Under Section 73(5) of GST Act Not Challengeable Before Show Cause Notice or Final Order
Case-Laws
GST
The HC rejected the writ petition challenging an intimation of tax issued under Section 73(5) of the KGST/CGST Act, 2017 as premature. The Court noted that the intimation merely ascertained tax with options for the petitioner to either pay with interest or file submissions. The document itself provided an opportunity for the petitioner to respond, and no show cause notice under Section 73(1) or final order under Section 73(9) had yet been issued. The Court concluded that judicial intervention was unwarranted at this preliminary stage of the tax assessment process.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST Registration Cancellation Cannot Be Applied Retrospectively Without Prior Notice and Proper Reasoning
Case-Laws
GST
The HC modified the GST registration cancellation order, ruling that it would take effect from the date of the Show Cause Notice (12 February 2024) rather than retrospectively from 7 February 2019. The Court found the retrospective cancellation invalid due to absence of supporting reasons in the original SCN and failure to provide prior notice to the petitioner, which violated principles of natural justice. The Court determined these procedural defects alone were sufficient grounds to grant relief, consequently quashing the retrospective aspect of the impugned order while allowing the cancellation to stand from the SCN date.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Delhi govt's revenue collections below projections, except for GST and VAT
GST
Dated:- 17-3-2025
PTI
New Delhi, Mar 16 (PTI) The revenue collections of the Delhi government, except for GST and VAT, are likely to remain below the budget projections, officials said on Sunday.
According to official data, the Goods and Services Tax (GST) and Value Added Tax (VAT) collections were Rs 40,009 crore (tentative) as of February 2025. The collections from motor vehicle taxes and excise revenu

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

After popcorn, now turn of donuts to get afflicted by 'GSTitis': Congress
GST
Dated:- 15-3-2025
PTI
New Delhi, Mar 15 (PTI) The Congress on Saturday took a swipe at the government over its implementation of differential GST rates, saying that after popcorn, it is now the turn of donuts to get afflicted by “GSTitis”.
Congress general secretary in-charge communications Jairam Ramesh cited a media report on X which stated that Singapore-based chain Mad Over Donuts is facing a Rs 100 crore tax notice for allegedly misclassifying its business and paying 5 per cent GST, claiming it is a restaurant service, as opposed to paying 18 per cent tax on bakery items.
“After popcorn, it is now the turn of donuts to get afflicted by GSTitis

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Anticipatory Bail Granted in GST Fraud Case Involving Fake Input Tax Credit to Multiple Taxpayers
Case-Laws
GST
The HC granted anticipatory bail to the applicant implicated in a case involving fake input tax credit allegedly passed to 14 taxpayers including the applicant's firm. The court applied established principles for bail consideration, including: nature and gravity of accusations, applicant's antecedents, flight risk, and potential malicious intent behind the accusation. While acknowledging that detailed examination of evidence should be avoided at this stage, the court allowed the application. The applicant, upon arrest or appearance in connection with the FIR registered with DCB Police Station, Rajkot City, shall be released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond with one surety of like amount, subject to fulfillment of imposed conditions.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST Registration Cannot Be Retrospectively Canceled Without Proper Notice and Evidence Under Section 29 of CGST Act
Case-Laws
GST
The HC quashed the retrospective cancellation of GST registration under SS29 of CGST Act, 2017, finding procedural violations. Neither the SCN nor final order provided material evidence supporting the allegation under SS29(2)(e), nor did they notify the petitioner of intended retrospective cancellation. This procedural defect alone invalidated the action. The court clarified that authorities may continue proceedings regarding alleged fraudulent registration, provided the petitioner receives proper notice with supporting evidence. On time limitation, the court referenced Addichem Speciality LLP, confirming that condonation of delay depends on statutory provisions governing the remedy. The March 20, 2024 order was quashed insofar as it retrospectively canceled registration.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Court Sets Aside Order on Excess Input Tax Credit Claims, Directs 25% Deposit of Disputed Taxes Within Four Weeks
Case-Laws
GST
The HC set aside the impugned order dated 07.03.2024 concerning excess Input Tax Credit (ITC) claimed due to non-reconciliation of information, including ITC from cancelled dealers, return defaulters, and tax non-payers. The Court directed the petitioner to deposit 25% of the disputed taxes determined in the impugned order within four weeks from receipt of the Court's order, as the petitioner had expressed willingness to pay this amount. Upon this condition being fulfilled, the impugned order was set aside and the petition was disposed of.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Stipend Payments Through Training Program Coordinator Qualify as “Pure Agent” Transactions Under Rule 33, Exempt from GST
Case-Laws
GST
The AAR ruled that the applicant, who coordinates on-the-job training programs between universities and industry partners, acts as a “pure agent” under Rule 33 regarding stipend payments to trainees. The applicant functions merely as a conduit, receiving stipend amounts from industry partners and disbursing them in full to trainees without deductions. The AAR determined that the applicant satisfies all conditions of a pure agent, as it merely facilitates the payment process while the actual service is supplied by trainees to the industry partners. Consequently, the stipend amounts received by the applicant from industry partners and paid in full to trainees do not attract GST liability.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Fish Finders Not Eligible for 5% Tax Rate as They Don't Qualify as Essential Vessel Parts Under N/N. 1/2017
Case-Laws
GST
The AAR ruled that fish finders cannot be classified as parts of vessels under Chapter headings 8901, 8902, 8904, 8905, 8906, or 8907, and therefore are not eligible for the reduced 5% tax rate under Sr.No.252 of N/N. 1/2017 Central Tax (Rate). The authority determined that while fish finders are manufactured for use on fishing vessels and other watercraft, vessels remain complete and functional without them. Unlike essential components integral to a vessel's operation, fish finders are auxiliary equipment. The AAR distinguished between classification cases under Central Excise Tariff and the present matter, which concerned whether the product constituted a vessel part for tax rate determination purposes.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST Demand Quashed: Authorities Wrongly Combined Turnover of Two Firms Under Same PAN Number
Case-Laws
GST
HC quashed the show cause notice and demand raised against the petitioner (Jindal Communication) due to an erroneous assessment based on GST turnover discrepancies. The Court determined that the respondent authorities could not dispute the petitioner's explanation that the alleged turnover difference resulted from two separate firms (Jindal Communication and Jindal Marketing Company) being registered under the same PAN number. The authorities had incorrectly attributed the combined turnover to a single entity, leading to an unsustainable demand. The petition was accordingly allowed, invalidating both the notice and subsequent assessment order.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Assessment Orders Nullified After Tax Officer Denied Requested Personal Hearing, Violating Natural Justice Principles
Case-Laws
GST
The HC set aside assessment orders due to violation of principles of natural justice, as the Assessing Officer failed to grant personal hearing despite the petitioner's request in their reply notice. The Court held that when an assessee opts for personal hearing in their reply, the Assessing Officer must grant it, even if “no” was marked in the form. Following precedent from Assistant Commissioner of State Tax v. Commercial Steel Limited, the Court determined that writ petitions are maintainable against assessment orders when principles of natural justice are violated. The matter was remitted back to the Assessing Officer with specific direction to verify the bank realization certificate uploaded in the GST portal.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

60-Day Limitation Under GST Act Section 62(2) Is Directory, Not Mandatory for Filing Returns
Case-Laws
GST
The HC held that the 60-day limitation period under Section 62(2) of the GST Act is directory rather than mandatory. Where a registered person fails to file returns within the prescribed timeframe, resulting in best judgment assessment orders, the right to file returns cannot be denied merely because the 60-day period has elapsed. If the taxpayer demonstrates valid reasons beyond their control for the delay, such delay can be condoned upon application. The petitioner was directed to file a delay condonation application within 15 days, which the second respondent must consider on merits before permitting revised returns. 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

= = = = = = = =

Improper GST Notice Service Through Portal Only Violates Natural Justice Under Section 161 of GST Act
Case-Laws
GST
The HC set aside orders passed under Section 161 of the Tamil Nadu/Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 due to violation of natural justice principles. The Department failed to serve notices through physical means, instead making them available only in the GST Portal under “View of additional notices and orders” column, which petitioner was unaware of. The Court determined the impugned orders were passed ex parte without affording the petitioner opportunity of hearing. The matters were remanded to the first respondent for fresh consideration with direction to provide proper notice and hearing opportunity to the petitioner.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST Appeal Rejection Overturned: Small Business Owner Gets Second Chance Despite Form Error and 19-Day Delay
Case-Laws
GST
The HC quashed the order rejecting the petitioner's GST appeal due to time limitation. Despite the petitioner erroneously writing “NA” in the delay explanation section of GST APL-04 form, the Court found no lack of bona fide, noting the petitioner had made the required pre-deposit of Rs. 10,900/- when filing the appeal. Considering the petitioner's status as a small businessman, the 19-day delay, and that no advantage was gained by filing a belated appeal, the Court directed the appellate authority to allow the petitioner to file a condonation of delay application, thereby providing an opportunity for the appeal to be heard on merits.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =