Goods and Services Tax

GST fraud: ED raids in multiple states
GST
Dated:- 7-8-2025
PTI
New Delhi, Aug 7 (PTI) The Enforcement Directorate on Thursday conducted fresh searches in Jharkhand, West Bengal and Maharashtra as part of a “fake” GST invoices generation case to the tune of Rs 750 crore, official sources said.
At least a dozen premises in the three states were raided under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), the sources said.
The case pertains to generation of Rs 750 crore “fake” Input T

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Writ Petition Dismissed Against Notice for Fraudulent Input Tax Credit; Appeal Must Follow Appellate Process
Case-Laws
GST
The HC dismissed the writ petition challenging the notice issued for fraudulent availment of Input Tax Credit (ITC) involving four suppliers, with the petitioner as a recipient. The Court held that writ petitions are generally not maintainable in cases of alleged fraudulent ITC claims and emphasized that the petitioner must pursue remedies through the prescribed appellate process. The Court noted that the impugned order is appealable and the petitioner's grievances can be addressed before the Appellate Authority. Consequently, the petition was disposed of, reinforcing the principle that disputes concerning fraudulent ITC claims should be resolved via statutory appeal mechanisms rather than writ jurisdiction.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Order quashed for failing natural justice due to improper notice service under Section 73 of GST Act
Case-Laws
GST
The HC quashed and set aside the impugned order dated April 19, 2024, holding that the petitioner was denied principles of natural justice due to improper service of notices under section 73 of the Act via the GST Portal's “Additional Notices and Orders” tab, which the petitioner did not access. The court found the petitioner entitled to benefit of doubt, as no evidence showed the notices appeared under the “view notices and orders” tab, preventing the petitioner from responding or challenging the order within limitation. The HC directed the Assessing Officer to issue a fresh notice with at least 15 days' clear period in accordance with law, allowing further proceedings thereafter. The petition was allowed without calling for counter affidavits or relegating to statutory remedies, emphasizing procedural fairness.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Secondment of Employees Subject to Service Tax; No Penalty Under Section 74 CGST Act, Interest Payable from Service Date
Case-Laws
GST
The HC held that the petitioner's secondment of employees was correctly held by the Apex Court to be exigible to service tax, reversing the Tribunal's favorable order for the assessee. The petitioner disclosed the transaction and paid the applicable tax upon the Apex Court's ruling. The court found no wilful misstatement, suppression, or tax evasion under Section 74 of the CGST Act, 2017, thus negating the imposition of penalty. However, interest on the delayed tax payment is payable from the date of service availment, with the exact amount to be determined by the tax authorities. The matter was remitted to the relevant authority for fresh determination of interest liability. The petition was allowed in part, confirming tax and interest liability but excluding penalty under Section 74.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Uploading GST show cause notice online alone violates natural justice; Section 169(1) requires effective alternative service methods
Case-Laws
GST
The HC held that mere uploading of the show cause notice (SCN) on the GST portal without physical service does not satisfy the principles of natural justice, particularly when the petitioner remains unresponsive. The officer issuing repeated reminders must consider alternative service methods under Section 169(1) of the GST Act, such as RPAD, to ensure effective notice. The impugned assessment order dated 29.04.2024 was passed ex parte without affording the petitioner a personal hearing, rendering it invalid. Consequently, the HC set aside the order and remanded the matter to the respondent for fresh consideration, directing adherence to proper service and hearing procedures. 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

= = = = = = = =

Penalty under Section 129(1) reduced due to no tax evasion and valid reasons for e-way bill delay
Case-Laws
GST
The HC held that in the absence of any intent to evade tax, the imposition of a 200% penalty under Section 129(1) of the WBGST/CGST Act, 2017 for transporting goods without a valid e-way bill was unwarranted. The appellants' reasons for the e-way bill's expiration, which caused highway blockage, were neither disputed nor considered by the authorities. The court noted no dispute regarding the goods, their nature, or transport documents, deeming the case unsuitable for such a heavy penalty. While acknowledging the statutory requirement for a valid e-way bill, the court recognized mitigating circumstances for delay in renewal. Consequently, the penalty was reduced to a notional amount of Rs. 25,000. The appeal and writ petition were allowed, the original penalty order set aside, and the excess amount remitted by the appellants was ordered to be refunded within three weeks.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST registration cancelled for non-filing over six months under Section 29(2)(c) and Rule 22 CGST Rules
Case-Laws
GST
The HC upheld the cancellation of the petitioner's GST registration under Section 29(2)(c) of the Act due to non-filing of returns for a continuous period exceeding six months. The Court emphasized that the empowered officer may cancel registration with retrospective effect as per Rule 22 of the CGST Rules, 2017. However, the proviso to sub-rule (4) of Rule 22 allows the officer to drop cancellation proceedings if the petitioner furnishes all pending returns and pays the outstanding tax, interest, and late fees. The petition was disposed of with a direction that the petitioner may approach the competent authority within two months to seek restoration of GST registration by complying with these conditions.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

SCN under Section 93 GST cannot be issued to deceased without notice to legal representative
Case-Laws
GST
The HC held that issuance of a show cause notice (SCN) and determination of liability under Section 93 of the GST Act cannot be made against a deceased person without issuing notice to the legal representative. The provision contemplates liability only where the business is continued by the legal representative or discontinued, requiring due process against the representative. In the present case, as the proprietor had died and the firm was cancelled, the SCN issued to the deceased without notice to the legal representative was invalid. Consequently, the HC quashed and set aside the impugned order dated 8.12.2023, holding that determination against a dead person is impermissible and recovery from the legal representative requires prior issuance of notice and opportunity to respond. The writ petition was allowed.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Ex Parte Cancellation Set Aside for Lack of Personal Service, Fair Hearing Directed Under Natural Justice Principles
Case-Laws
GST
The HC set aside the ex parte cancellation order dated 21.02.2025, holding that the petitioner was not afforded principles of natural justice as no personal service of the show cause notice was established. The Court noted the petitioner had ceased business prior to the notice period and thus had no opportunity to respond. Relying on precedents, the HC remanded the matter to the assessing authority, directing that the petitioner be given a fair opportunity to submit a response within three weeks and be heard before a fresh order is passed. The petition was allowed by way of remand, ensuring compliance with procedural fairness.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Goods Detention Under Section 129 CGST Quashed Due to Compliance With Rule 138A and Valid Documents
Case-Laws
GST
The HC held that the proceedings under Section 129 of the CGST Act against the petitioner were unsustainable as the petitioner complied with the statutory requirements under Rule 138A of the CGST Rules. The petitioner produced both the invoice issued by it and the E-way bill at the time of interception, which were the requisite documents for lawful transit of goods. Alleged discrepancies raised by the revenue were not reflected in any official notices and thus could not be relied upon to justify detention. Consequently, the HC quashed the impugned notices and orders initiating the proceedings, thereby setting aside the detention of goods and terminating the action under Section 129. The writ petition was allowed, resulting in the quashing of Exts.P2, P2(a), P2(b), and P3.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Show Cause Notice Must Follow GST Law Formats Post-2017; Pre-GST Circulars No Longer Valid
Case-Laws
GST
The HC held that the petitioner's challenge to the Show Cause Notice (SCN) on grounds of non-compliance with a pre-GST circular was untenable, as the circular predates the GST regime. Post 01.07.2017, issuance of SCNs must conform to the specific formats prescribed under GST law, namely Form GST DRC-01 or Form GST DRC-01A. The Court emphasized that adherence to these prescribed forms is mandatory, rendering the petitioner's reliance on the earlier circular irrelevant. Consequently, the HC found no merit in the petitioner's arguments regarding violation of natural justice principles due to SCN format and dismissed the petition.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Regular Bail Granted After Six-Year Delay; Emphasis on Presumption of Innocence and Prolonged Trial
Case-Laws
GST
The HC granted regular bail to the petitioner, who was nominated after a six-year delay in a case filed in 2019. The petitioner had already undergone incarceration for 2 months and 19 days, and similarly situated co-accused had been granted bail. The Court noted the petitioner's clean antecedents and emphasized the presumption of innocence until proven guilty beyond reasonable doubt. Since the challan was filed recently and none of the 40 prosecution witnesses had been examined, the trial was expected to be protracted. Prolonged detention was deemed unnecessary. The petitioner was ordered to be released on furnishing bail and surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate. The petition was allowed in accordance with established criminal jurisprudence favoring bail as the norm and detention as the exception.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Detention Declared Illegal Under GST Law; Immediate Release Ordered with Strict Future Compliance Required
Case-Laws
GST
The HC declared the detention of the petitioner's husband by respondents No. 2 and 3 illegal and ordered his immediate release. The Court accepted the respondents' affidavit explanation but emphasized strict future compliance and cooperation with Court-appointed officers by the Directorate General, Goods & Service Tax Intelligence. Relying on precedents from the Supreme Court and various High Courts, the HC directed the jail authorities to release the petitioner forthwith, provided he is not implicated in any other case. The petition was allowed, ensuring the petitioner's husband's recovery from unlawful custody.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Petitioner entitled to CGST refund despite form errors; natural justice violation found in denial without hearing
Case-Laws
GST
The HC held that the petitioner was entitled to the CGST refund despite citation of an incorrect provision or typographical errors in the refund application forms. Such technical defects cannot justify rejection of the substantive claim. The appellate authority erred in law by dismissing the refund on this ground without adjudicating the claim on merits. Further, the adverse finding against the petitioner for failure to adduce evidence was passed without issuing a proper show cause notice or affording an opportunity of hearing, thus violating principles of natural justice. Consequently, the impugned orders were quashed, and the matter was remitted to the appellate authority for fresh determination in accordance with the observations. The petition was allowed by way of remand.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Assignment of Leasehold Rights Not a Supply of Service Under Section 7(1)(a); GST Not Applicable Under Section 9
Case-Laws
GST
The HC held that the assignment of leasehold rights by the petitioner constitutes a transfer of benefits arising from immovable property and does not amount to a supply of service under Section 7(1)(a) of the Act. Consequently, such transactions fall outside the scope of GST levy under Section 9, as clarified by Clauses 5(b) of Schedule 2 and 5 of Schedule 3 of the Act. The impugned order passed under Section 74 was quashed and set aside, and the petition was allowed, confirming that GST is not applicable on the assignment of leasehold rights in this context.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Petition Dismissed on ITC Denial and Electronic Credit Ledger Blocking Under GST Rules Section 16
Case-Laws
GST
The HC dismissed the petition challenging the blocking of the electronic credit ledger and denial of ITC, finding no violation of natural justice or jurisdictional error. Although the petitioner alleged non-availability of documents and lack of opportunity for cross-examination, the court observed that the petitioner's representative opposed re-examination and did not participate, and the adjudication order addressed the petitioner's responses comprehensively. The petitioner failed to utilize the appellate remedy and instead directly approached the HC. The court emphasized the petitioner's initial burden to produce evidence, including toll plaza reports, to substantiate transportation of goods, which was not discharged. Consequently, the State was not obligated to prove the petitioner's claim. The petitioner's reliance on a separate case concerning public auction and refund was deemed inapplicable. No illegality or irregularity was found in the proper officer's order, leading to dismissal of the petition.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Input Tax Credit Denial Upheld; Matter Remanded for Revised Assessment Under Section 22(17)
Case-Laws
GST
The HC dismissed the writ petitioners' challenge to the denial of input tax credit, finding that neither the assessment order nor subsequent authorities had adequately examined or verified the credit computation. The revisional authority's determination of allowable input tax credit at Rs. 36,36,100 under section 22(17) was upheld. The revisional Board's order was set aside, and the matter remanded to the AO to grant the specified credit and issue a revised assessment within eight weeks of receiving the judgment. The petition was allowed solely by way of remand to ensure the petitioners receive the input tax credit as determined by the revisional authority.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Impugned order quashed on ineligible ITC claim; 25% disputed tax deposit required under GST rules
Case-Laws
GST
The HC quashed the impugned order relating to ineligible ITC claimed via an invoice from a non-existent dealer, subject to the petitioner depositing 25% of the disputed tax within 30 days. The quashed order is deemed an addendum to the show cause notice, requiring the petitioner to file a detailed reply within 30 days. Upon compliance, the blocked credit shall be unblocked, and the respondent must pass a fresh order on merits within three months. The petition is disposed of accordingly.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Petitioner granted extended time to file appeal under CGST Act with opportunity for personal hearings and merit-based review
Case-Laws
GST
The HC found a violation of natural justice as the Petitioner was not granted the mandated three personal hearings under the Central Goods and Services Act and was unaware of both the Show Cause Notice and the impugned order. Despite the demand of Rs. 88,474/- raised against the Petitioner without affording an opportunity to reply or appear, the Court exercised writ jurisdiction to extend the time for filing the appeal until 31 August 2025 with the requisite pre-deposit. The appeal filed within this extended period shall not be dismissed on limitation grounds and will be adjudicated on merits. The Petitioner is permitted to present its case before the Appellate Authority, which must consider it on its own merits. 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

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =