Goods and Services Tax

GST portal show-cause notice hidden under “Additional Notices” tab, denying hearing; proceedings set aside and remanded.
Case-Laws
GST
The dominant issue was violation of principles of natural justice where the show cause notice was uploaded only in the “Additional Notices” tab on the GST portal and was not effectively brought to the taxpayer's knowledge, resulting in no reply being filed. Applying prior precedent in similar portal-notice situations, the Court held that absence of a real opportunity of hearing vitiated the adjudicatory process, particularly since the notice pre-dated the portal changes that later made the tab visible. The impugned proceedings were therefore set aside and remanded to the adjudicating authority to grant a fair opportunity to respond and be heard – HC
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST registration cancellation for non-filed returns challenged; revocation allowed after tax, interest, late fees paid and returns filed.
Case-Laws
GST
Cancellation of GST registration for non-filing of returns was challenged. Since the petitioner had already deposited the outstanding tax along with interest and late payment charges as if the returns had been duly filed, the Court held that justice warranted permitting filing of the pending GST returns. It further held that if the returns, upon scrutiny, were found not in accordance with law, the petitioner must immediately pay any consequential demand raised by the authorities. On such compliance, the cancellation order was directed to be treated as revoked and the petition was disposed of. – HC
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Delay in statutory appeal filing blamed on counsel's wife's hospitalization; no medical proof, so condonation denied and writ dismissed
Case-Laws
GST
Challenge to dismissal of the statutory appeal as time-barred beyond four months turned on whether sufficient cause was shown for condonation. The petitioner relied on alleged hospitalization of counsel's wife but produced no supporting medical documents or counsel declaration either before the appellate authority or with the writ, despite repeated opportunities and adjournments, including after refiling following registry objections. In the absence of any material substantiating the pleaded cause, no arbitrariness or perversity was shown warranting interference under Article 226. The writ petition was dismissed, affirming rejection of the appeal on limitation. – HC
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

IGST refund for exported goods denied for missing Rule 96A LUT/bond; rejection set aside, claim remanded for reconsideration.
Case-Laws
GST
Rejection of IGST refund for exported goods solely on the ground that the exporter had not furnished bond/LUT prior to export under Rule 96A of the CGST Rules was held unsustainable because the governing circular clarifies that non-furnishing of LUT/bond is not an incurable or strictly mandatory defect and may be accepted ex post facto depending on the facts and purpose of the refund claim. Since the refund authority failed to consider and apply the circular while rejecting the claim, the rejection order was set aside and the refund application was remitted for fresh consideration in accordance with law. – HC
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Excess input tax credit claim decided ex parte while key notifications under challenge; orders set aside, matter remanded
Case-Laws
GST
Ex parte adjudication and appellate orders denying the taxpayer's claim of excess input tax credit were challenged for breach of natural justice and for proceeding despite the governing notifications being under consideration before the apex forum. Since the validity of the relevant notifications was sub judice and likely to affect the impugned proceedings, the matter required fresh consideration to avoid conflicting decisions and multiplicity of proceedings. The adjudication orders and the appellate order were set aside and the case was remitted to the adjudicating authority to pass a fresh order in accordance with law after the pending challenge to the notifications is disposed of. – HC
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST registration cancellation against deceased sole proprietor: notices to dead person held void; orders quashed, fresh action allowed
Case-Laws
GST
Proceedings for cancellation of GST registration initiated and concluded against the deceased ex-proprietor were void ab initio, as notices and orders must be issued to the legal representative and not to a dead person; such actions are a nullity and non est in law. Applying this principle, the impugned cancellation orders were quashed, with liberty to the department to initiate fresh proceedings in accordance with law against the appropriate legal representative, if permissible. Petition allowed – HC
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Refund claim for GST paid on transfer of assignment rights-Form GST RFD-03 deficiency memo quashed; application revived for processing.
Case-Laws
GST
A deficiency memo issued in Form GST RFD-03 under Rule 90(3) rejecting a refund claim on the ground that no GST Council notification/circular existed on refund relating to GST paid on transfer of assignment rights was challenged. The Court held that such a ground could not sustain rejection at the deficiency memo stage and the refund application was required to be processed in accordance with law. Consequently, the deficiency memo was quashed, the refund application was revived, and the authorities were directed to pass a reasoned order on the refund claim within three weeks of receipt of the revived application. – HC
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST appeal delayed due to non-functional Tribunal; liberty to file appeal on operationalisation, s.112(9) stay continues meanwhile
Case-Laws
GST
Given the non-functional status of the GST Appellate Tribunal, the writ petitioner sought liberty to pursue the statutory appellate remedy once the Tribunal becomes operational. Relying on relevant executive notifications and circulars evidencing constitution/operationalization of the Tribunal, the Court directed that upon the President/State President assuming office, the petitioner may file an appeal under the CGST/SGST framework with the requisite statutory pre-deposit, and the appellate authority shall decide it in accordance with law. The statutory stay under s.112(9) shall continue until disposal of the appeal, failing which recovery may proceed if the appeal is not filed within limitation. – HC
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Motor vehicle chassis transport seized over e-way bill expiry from wrong auto-filled Part-B distance; penalty quashed
Case-Laws
GST
Seizure of goods and levy of penalty were challenged on the ground that the e-way bill validity allegedly expired due to an auto-generated Part-B showing an incorrect distance. The goods were motor vehicle chassis duly accompanied by tax invoice, e-way bill, sale certificate, and temporary registration, and the delivery location was specifically reflected in the documents. As the distance field was auto-populated after Part-A and was not editable by the taxpayer, the authority had no basis to infer tax evasion, and mere expiry of an e-way bill was held insufficient to establish intent to evade tax. The seizure and penalty order was quashed and the petition was allowed – HC
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST s.73 recovery proceedings challenged over no hearing and non-application of mind; recovery orders quashed as arbitrary
Case-Laws
GST
Recovery proceedings under s.73 of the GST Act were challenged on the ground that no opportunity of hearing was afforded and the impugned orders reflected non-application of mind. Applying the principle that an order passed without due application of mind is arbitrary and fails the Article 14 test, and noting the breach of natural justice, the Court held the recovery action legally unsustainable; consequently, the impugned orders were quashed and the writ petition was allowed. – HC
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST summons over alleged s.132 tax evasion by client firms: chartered accountant's limited role leads to anticipatory bail
Case-Laws
GST
Anticipatory bail was sought apprehending arrest for alleged offences under s.132 of the Central/Gujarat GST Acts pursuant to summons under s.70. The court held that the core allegation of tax evasion pertained to the applicant's client firms, whereas the applicant, being only a chartered accountant maintaining/auditing accounts, was not engaged in supply/manufacture/trade and could not be treated as the person liable to pay GST for any alleged evasion by those firms; statutory recovery mechanisms apply against the liable taxable persons. Applying the liberal and fact-specific discretion under s.438 CrPC, anticipatory bail was granted subject to bond/surety and conditions. – DSC
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Alleged goods-less invoicing and ineligible CENVAT credit claim challenged for missing documents; writ dismissed for non-participation, appeal available
Case-Laws
GST
Challenge to adjudication alleging fraudulent availment of ineligible CENVAT credit on the ground that relied-upon documents were not supplied was rejected because the noticee was fully aware of the show-cause notice yet neither filed any substantive reply nor effectively participated in adjudication, leaving the allegations unrebutted. Given the nature of alleged goods-less invoicing and complex, evidence-intensive transaction chains, the dispute required factual examination unsuitable for writ jurisdiction, and the noticee's interests were adequately protected by the statutory appellate remedy. The writ petition was dismissed. – HC
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

SVLDR Scheme eligibility for second show-cause notice after cut-off date: rejection upheld, but late appeal permitted
Case-Laws
GST
Eligibility to avail the SVLDR Scheme for a second show cause notice issued after the Scheme's prescribed cut-off date was the dominant issue. The Court held that mere cross-reference to an earlier notice, or reliance on documents from it, does not render the later notice a continuation of the earlier proceedings; the later notice was an independent demand with separate quantification and adjudication. Since notices issued beyond the Scheme deadline are ineligible, rejection of the Scheme application for the later notice was upheld. However, to avoid denial of statutory remedies due to pendency of the writ, the petitioner was permitted to file an appeal against the adjudication order within the extended time granted. – HC
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST fraud: Four booked for setting up fake firms, claiming Rs 22.06 crore ITC
GST
Dated:- 21-12-2025
PTI
Thane, Dec 21 (PTI) A case has been registered against four persons in Maharashtra's Thane district for allegedly creating fake GST-registered firms and claiming input tax credit of more than Rs 22.06 crore, police said on Sunday.
Based on a complaint lodged by an official from the State Goods and Services Tax (SGST) department, the police in Kalyan on Thursday registered a case

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Post-sale discounts via financial credit notes and GST input tax credit reversal-when ITC stands, and valuation shifts
Circulars
GST – States
Input tax credit under the WBGST Act need not be reversed by a recipient where payment is reduced due to financial/commercial credit notes issued for secondary/post-sale discounts, because such credit notes do not reduce the original transaction value or the supplier's tax liability and therefore do not reduce tax charged. A manufacturer's post-sale discount to a dealer is not “consideration” for the dealer's onward supply to an end customer where there is no manufacturer-end customer agreement and the discount merely reduces the dealer's sale price; consequently, no additional GST consequence arises on that ground. Where the manufacturer has an agreement with an end customer and funds the dealer's discounted sale, the discount forms part of consideration for the dealer's supply to the end customer, affecting valuation accordingly. Post-sale discounts are not consideration for promotional services unless specific services and consideration are contractually defined, in which case GST applies to that service supply.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Goods detained over wrong “ship to” PIN code on e-way bill; Section 129 detention and penalty orders quashed.
Case-Laws
GST
Proceedings under Section 129 of the CGST Act were initiated solely because the e-way bill reflected an incorrect PIN code for the “ship to” location, though the consignee details and destination (Samastipur, Bihar) were otherwise correctly stated and the goods were accompanied by requisite documents including tax invoice, e-way bill and GR. Applying the legal position that a mere PIN code error, when the consignor/consignee address is otherwise correct, does not justify detention proceedings under Section 129, the impugned detention and penalty orders were held unsustainable and were quashed, and the writ petition was allowed. – HC
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Input tax credit availment and goods movement scrutiny: s.74 notice lacked fraud/suppression claims, so demand orders quashed
Case-Laws
GST
Proceedings initiated under s.74 of the SGST Act were held without jurisdiction because the show cause notice failed to allege the statutory preconditions of fraud, wilful misstatement, or suppression of facts for wrongful or excess availment/utilisation of input tax credit; absent these foundational averments, the authority could not assume s.74 jurisdiction. The record showed actual movement of goods and that returns and tax payments were reflected in GSTR-1, GSTR-2A and GSTR-3B, and the revenue did not specifically deny these compliances, making any adverse inference unjustified. The impugned orders were quashed and the petition was allowed – HC
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Delhi HC asks Customs to respond to IndiGoÂ’s plea seeking refund of Rs 900 cr duty
GST
Dated:- 19-12-2025
PTI
New Delhi, Dec 19 (PTI) The Delhi High Court on Friday sought a response from the Customs department on a plea by InterGlobe Aviation, which operates the IndiGo airline, seeking a refund of more than Rs 900 crore paid as Customs duty on aircraft engines and parts re-imported into India after overseas repairs.
A bench of Justices V Kameswar Rao and Vinod Kumar issued the notice to the deputy commissioner (refund), office of the principal commissioner of Customs, Air Cargo Complex (Import), and asked the authorities to file a counter affidavit within two weeks.
The court listed the matter for next hearing on April 8, 202

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ge basis.
However, the Customs authorities insisted on levying duty again by treating the same transaction as import of goods, the counsel claimed.
The company claimed the issue was settled earlier by the Customs tribunal, which held that Customs duty could not be levied again on re-imports following repairs.
It said the exemption notification was later amended but the tribunal ruled that the amendment would apply only prospectively.
The company said it paid the duty under protest for more than 4,000 bills of entry, amounting to more than Rs 900 crore.
When InterGlobe later filed refund claims, the Customs authorities refused them on the ground that the airline must first seek reassessment of each bill of entry. PTI SKV ARI
News –

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Fraudulent ITC claim demand and show-cause notice service dispute, consolidated multi-year notice upheld; writ dismissed with costs.
Case-Laws
GST
Challenge to a demand order for alleged fraudulent availment of ITC was rejected as the noticee failed to reply to the show cause notice despite being aware of the investigation, and personal hearing intimations sent to the registered email were held duly served, rendering the non-service plea false. Issuance of a consolidated show cause notice covering multiple financial years was held permissible, as analysis across “periods” can be necessary to establish a pattern of fraud. On adjudicatory jurisdiction, it was held that in multi-noticee matters jurisdiction lies with the commissionerate linked to the highest proposed demand, consistent with the relevant circular. Writ jurisdiction was declined given disputed facts and availability of statutory appeal; the petition was dismissed with exemplary costs. – HC
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Composite GST show-cause notice clubbing multiple financial years u/s73/s.74 held invalid; FY 2019-20 to 2023-24 notice quashed.
Case-Laws
GST
Clubbing multiple tax periods/financial years in a single composite show-cause notice under s.73/s.74 of the CGST/KGST Act was held impermissible because the statutory scheme treats each financial year as an independent assessment unit with separate returns, reconciliation, evaluation of transactions/ITC, and year-specific limitation; the Act does not contemplate consolidated proceedings, rendering such notices without jurisdiction. Consequently, the composite show-cause notice covering FY 2019-20 to 2023-24 and all consequential proceedings were quashed, with liberty reserved to initiate fresh action in accordance with law. – HC
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST delayed return filing and DRC-01 reply: if confirmed tax already paid, no extra pre-deposit; remand ordered.
Case-Laws
GST
In a challenge concerning GST proceedings for delayed return filing, the court noted that no late fee under s.47 had been imposed, and held that if the confirmed tax demand had already been recovered and paid, no further pre-deposit would be required for the de novo proceedings arising from the impugned order dated 24.08.2024, and the assessee must file a reply to Form GST DRC-01 with supporting documents treating the impugned orders as an addendum to the show cause notice. The challenge to the assessment order was dismissed, while the remaining impugned orders were remanded subject to deposit of 50% of the disputed tax. – HC
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Input tax credit claims for May 2018-March 2019 returns: Section 16(5) overrides Section 16(4) time bar, relief granted. (5)
Case-Laws
GST
Input tax credit was denied on the ground that returns for May 2018-March 2019 were not filed within the time limit under Section 16(4) of the CGST Act. The Court held that the subsequently introduced Section 16(5) creates an overriding entitlement, since it begins with a non obstante clause and imposes only the condition that the relevant returns be filed on or before 30 November 2021; upon such filing, the limitation under Section 16(4) becomes inapplicable. The earlier adverse order in prior proceedings challenging Section 16(4) did not bar relief, as Section 16(5) furnished a fresh statutory basis. Relief was granted and the petition was disposed of. – HC
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Changes in employment guarantee scheme will severely impact states: Kerala FM
GST
Dated:- 18-12-2025
PTI
Kochi, Dec 18 (PTI) Kerala Finance Minister K N Balagopal on Thursday said changes brought to the employment guarantee scheme would severely impact states.
Speaking to reporters here in the wake of the G RAM G Bill introduced by the Centre in Parliament to replace the MGNREGA scheme, Balagopal said converting the employment guarantee scheme to a 60:40 funding ratio would adversely affect states and limit employment generation under the scheme.
“The union government is backtracking from its responsibilities under the Centre–state relationship. Last year, Rs 80,000 crore was earmarked for states. The reasonable share due to t

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ne would suffer a financial loss of Rs 8,000 crore to Rs 10,000 crore annually due to tax reforms.
“Recent figures show that the study was right,” he said.
“After the new rate, for the first time, states in India have witnessed negative growth. KeralaÂ’s situation is relatively better, but the growth rate in the state will also decline,” he said.
He said automobile sales rose by 65 per cent in several states following the rate revision during the festive season, but questioned the sustainability of such consumption.
“Will we buy a car every month? Nobody buys a car even every year,” he said.
Balagopal said although the rate revision was intended to boost consumption, prices of goods have not come down, as per studies.
“In the end, tax

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

uarantee scheme enhanced incomes in rural areas, but fund cuts would reduce state revenues by at least Rs 2,000 crore per year, he said, adding that earlier 90 per cent of the scheme was funded by the Centre, but that has now changed.
In Kerala alone, 9.07 crore employment days were generated last year, involving 13.72 lakh families, while around 22 lakh people have enrolled under the scheme, he said.
Balagopal said the recent developments would put the Indian economy and the lives of common people across the country under stress.
“It will have far-reaching consequences, pushing both states and the Centre into trouble,” he said.
Lok Sabha on Thursday passed a bill to replace the 20-year-old scheme MGNREGA amid tearing of papers by oppos

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Consolidated FAQs on GSTR -9/9C for FY 2024-25
GST
Dated:- 18-12-2025

GSTN has published series of FAQ on 16th Oct, 2025 and 4th Dec, 2025 for assisting the taxpayer in filing of Annual R

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST Section 70 summons for inquiry and document production upheld; challenge rejected as premature, not starting proceedings
Case-Laws
GST
Summons issued under Section 70 of the CGST Act are a statutory tool for inquiry to secure attendance, evidence, and production of documents, and such inquiry is deemed a judicial proceeding under Section 70(2) read with Sections 193 and 228 of the IPC. Since a summons under Section 70 is primarily for information-gathering and affording an opportunity to produce material, it does not amount to initiation of proceedings against the noticee, and objections alleging violation of internal guidelines do not justify quashing at this stage. Consequently, the writ petitions challenging the summons were held to be premature and were dismissed. – HC
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =