Goods and Services Tax

GST benefit pass-through and ticket pricing: tribunal upheld profiteering, included maintenance charge, but refused penalty prospectively.
Case-Laws
GST
Section 171 was applied to hold that any GST rate reduction must be passed on through a commensurate reduction in the consumer price, and the Tribunal found that cinema ticket prices were not reduced after the tax cut while the base price was increased. The State regulatory ceiling was treated as only a maximum price cap, not a bar on lowering prices, and the claim of cost escalation failed for want of proof. The maintenance charge collected with the ticket was held to form part of the ticket value for GST and anti-profiteering computation. The profiteered amount was directed to be deposited in the Consumer Welfare Funds with interest, but penalty was declined because the penal provision had not yet come into force.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Natural justice requires personal hearing before ex parte GST assessment based on portal service can be sustained.
Case-Laws
GST
Service of GST notices through the common portal after cancellation of registration was treated as effective for the proceedings discussed, but the Court found that an ex parte assessment made without giving the taxpayer the hearing required under Section 75(4) and the principles of natural justice could not stand. The assessment order and consequential recovery proceedings were quashed. The department was left free to recommence the matter in accordance with law after obtaining the taxpayer's reply to the show-cause notice and granting a personal hearing.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Bona fide GSTR-1 errors and input tax credit relief under section 16(5) cannot be denied without hearing the taxpayer.
Case-Laws
GST
The HC held that bona fide errors in GSTR-1, including a wrong tax-rate entry and incorrect mention of a credit note, can be corrected, and the taxpayer must be given an opportunity under Rule 88C to explain the mismatch before liability is fastened. The impugned order was set aside because the authority acted without calling for an explanation on the GSTR-1 and GSTR-3B discrepancy. The Court further held that denial of input tax credit for FY 2018-19 was unsustainable after insertion of section 16(5), which overrides section 16(4) for the relevant periods; the taxpayer was therefore entitled to claim the credit within the extended statutory window.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Premature writ petition under GST pre-deposit notice disposed with directions on tribunal stay application and recovery notice
Case-Laws
GST
A High Court disposed of the writ petition as premature and directed the Deputy Commissioner of State Tax to pass an order on the impugned notice within one week, since a hearing on the notice had already been concluded. The Court noted that the petitioner could move an interim stay application before the GST Tribunal after the portal became available for such filings. It further directed that any contemplated recovery must be preceded by 10 days' prior notice, and kept all contentions open.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Provisional release of goods and conveyance allowed during revision, subject to indemnity bond and undertaking for revenue protection.
Case-Laws
GST
The HC directed provisional release of goods and conveyance during pending revisional proceedings after noting that the first appellate authority had already modified the confiscation order and imposed liability under Section 129(1)(a), which the petitioner had satisfied. Because the revision had not yet resulted in a final order reviving action under Section 130, release was allowed but subject to revenue protection. The petitioner was required to furnish an indemnity bond and remain bound by the undertaking already filed, while the revenue retained liberty to enforce the revisional outcome. The merits of the revision were left open for the revisional authority.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST appeal limitation cannot be bypassed through writ jurisdiction; conditional liberty granted to file appeal on deposit.
Case-Laws
GST
The High Court declined to interfere in writ jurisdiction because the petitioner had an alternative statutory appeal under Section 107 and had filed the writ long after the appeal limitation expired. Relying on the principle that the statutory limitation for appeal under the GST Act cannot be extended, the Court held that the time bar could not be bypassed through writ proceedings. However, considering that the petitioner might have a case on merits, it granted conditional liberty to file an appeal before the appellate authority within the time fixed, subject to deposit of 25% of the disputed tax with credit for any amount already recovered, and directed that such appeal be decided on merits without reference to limitation.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Wrong statutory basis for waiver rejection led to quashing and remand for fresh consideration after hearing the taxpayer.
Case-Laws
GST
Rejection of the waiver application under Section 128A(1) could not stand because it was based on an incorrect statutory premise: the authority treated the underlying assessment as one under Section 74, whereas the record showed it had been passed under Section 73 and this was confirmed by the respondent. The Court therefore quashed the impugned order and remitted the matter for fresh consideration after hearing the petitioner. Any dispute about whether the petitioner had made sufficient payment was left open for reconsideration on remand, and the authority was left free to proceed in accordance with law if full payment had not in fact been made.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Anti-profiteering in real estate: project-wise ITC benefit had to be passed on to homebuyers, with GST and interest added.
Case-Laws
GST
In a real estate anti-profiteering matter, the Tribunal applied a project-wise, area-based method to quantify the benefit of GST input tax credit and upheld the DGAP's computation on the basis that post-GST credit savings had to be passed on to homebuyers. It rejected attempts to restrict the benefit to goods-related credit or to notionally adjust unavailed pre-GST service credit, and treated the respondent's verified statements as admissions that profiteering had occurred. The amount of profiteering was upheld with GST on the excess realisation, and interest was also directed from the date of payment of the last instalment by each buyer.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Penalty under GST section 73 not sustained, while delayed tax interest must be recomputed after adjusting excess payment.
Case-Laws
GST
Penalty under section 73 of the GST Act was found unjustified on the facts placed before the HC, and the petitioner was left free to make a proper representation on that issue. At the same time, once the tax liability was admitted, interest on belated payment remained payable under section 50(1). Because the order itself recorded an excess tax payment and there was doubt about the calculation, the interest had to be recomputed after adjusting the excess amount already paid. The matter was remitted for fresh determination of the correct interest payable, and only the balance, if any, could be demanded.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Mandatory pre-deposit under GST appeal rules must be complied with once the appellate forum is functional.
Case-Laws
GST
A writ petition was entertained only to the limited extent that no statutory appellate forum was then available, but the Court held that this did not permit bypassing the GST Act's appeal conditions. Once the GSTAT became functional and the appeal period was notified, the aggrieved party had to pursue the statutory remedy before that forum. The mandatory pre-deposit under Section 112(8) was required to be strictly complied with, and writ jurisdiction could not be used to secure relaxation from that requirement. The petitioner was directed to make the deposit and file the appeal within the notified timeline, with the merits of the appellate order left open.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Jurisdictional filing defect treated as procedural error; rejected statutory appeal restored and sent to the competent appellate authority.
Case-Laws
GST
The HC held that rejection of the statutory appeal on jurisdictional grounds was a departmental mistake where the office lacked a system to transmit the appeal to the correct appellate authority. Treating the defect as procedural rather than substantive, the Court set aside the impugned appellate order without examining the merits of the underlying dispute. The appeal was restored and directed to be transmitted to the competent appellate authority for consideration in accordance with law.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Bail in CGST fraud cases granted where no extraordinary circumstances justified denial and custody had continued without antecedents.
Case-Laws
GST
Bail was granted in CGST prosecution for alleged fraudulent input tax credit offences under Section 132(1)(b), (c), (f) and (i) because no extraordinary circumstances were shown to justify continued custody. The Court noted that the offences were triable by a Magistrate and carried a maximum punishment of five years, the accused had been in custody since 28.11.2025, no similar criminal antecedents were placed on record, and the Union of India produced no material warranting denial of bail. Relying on Vineet Jain and Satender Kumar Antil, the Court held that bail should follow without prejudice to merits and directed release on conditions.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Bank guarantee continuation for release of goods refused where taxpayer compliance record provided sufficient security
Case-Laws
GST
The High Court set aside endorsements refusing cancellation of a bank guarantee taken as security for release of goods and conveyance, holding that the guarantee was meant only to secure revenue if the confiscation order was ultimately upheld. On the petitioners' uncontroverted compliance record and absence of other confiscation proceedings, the Court treated them as prima facie bona fide taxpayers and found that their conduct itself provided adequate assurance for compliance with any final order. It therefore found no justification to keep the bank guarantee alive while other disputes remained pending, directed return of the guarantees, and stated that the direction was confined to the peculiar facts and would not operate as precedent.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Electronic credit ledger blocking under Rule 86A cannot create a negative balance; available credit alone may be restricted.
Case-Laws
GST
Rule 86A of the GST Rules permits only a temporary restriction on debit of input tax credit actually available in the electronic credit ledger; it does not authorise the Commissioner or an authorised officer to create a negative balance or block credit beyond the amount standing to the taxpayer's credit. Following earlier High Court precedent and aligned decisions of other High Courts, the Court held that availability of credit is a condition precedent for invoking the rule. The negative blocking of the taxpayer's electronic credit ledger was therefore unsustainable, though the authorities were left free to pursue other lawful recovery through statutory remedies.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

After Zomato, Swiggy hikes platform fee by 17 pc to Rs 17.58 per order
GST
Dated:- 24-3-2026
PTI
New Delhi, Mar 24 (PTI) Food delivery platform Swiggy has hiked the platform fee it charges users to Rs 17.58 per order, its app showed on Tuesday, days after rival Zomato increased the charges.

Swiggy had last hiked its platform fee in September last year.

The company has now raised it to Rs 17.58 per order inclusive of GST, whereas rival Zomato charges Rs 14.90 on a pre-GST basi

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Retrospective ITC time limit: HC preserves credit where returns were filed by 30.11.2021, despite limitation bar.
Case-Laws
GST
Retrospective amendment to the GST time limit for availing input tax credit preserved ITC entitlement for financial years 2017-18 to 2020-21 where the return under Section 39 had been filed up to 30.11.2021, despite the bar in Section 16(4). The HC, following its earlier common order on the amended provision, quashed the impugned reversal to the extent it denied ITC solely on limitation and protected the taxpayer from recovery on that basis. It left the Department free to proceed separately on other permissible grounds, including wrong, excess or fake ITC, if established independently of limitation.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Anti-profiteering and input tax credit: unpassed benefit must be refunded with interest, and penalty may apply within the operative period.
Case-Laws
GST
Additional input tax credit benefit under anti-profiteering rules had to be passed on to homebuyers at the time of supply, and the Tribunal accepted the DGAP's revised computation showing that the benefit was not fully transferred. It directed refund of the unpassed amount with interest at 18% per annum from the respective dates of collection until actual repayment, treating retention of the benefit as excess consideration. It also held that penalty under Section 171(3A) applies to contraventions within its operative period, since the alleged profiteering overlapped the commencement date of that provision.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Electronic commerce operator status denied for transport platform; GST applies to commission and TCS compliance is required.
Case-Laws
GST
An electronic platform that connects transporters with customers, without itself undertaking transportation, issuing consignment notes, or performing ancillary transport functions, is an electronic commerce operator and not a goods transport agency. It also does not qualify as an agent or pure agent where it merely facilitates bookings and lacks the contractual conditions required under Rule 33. The exemption for transportation of goods by road was therefore unavailable. GST was held payable on the commission earned from transporters, and the operator was required to comply with tax collection at source under the e-commerce framework. The deeming liability for notified services supplied through e-commerce operators did not apply to transportation services.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Waste remediation services under GST classified in SAC 9994, with pure-service exemption available for municipal waste management work.
Case-Laws
GST
Waste dump remediation and legacy waste processing services, involving excavation, segregation, scientific disposal and conversion into RDF, compost, grit and inert fractions, were classified under SAC 9994 for sewage, waste collection, treatment, disposal and other environmental protection services, and held taxable at 18%. The supply to Goa Waste Management Corporation was nevertheless treated as pure services, because no goods were involved and the activity related to solid waste management and bio-remediation, a municipal function under Article 243W; exemption under Sl. No. 3 of Notification No. 12/2017-CT was therefore available. A separate query on the recipient's status was declined as outside the scope of advance ruling jurisdiction under Section 97(2).
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Input tax credit on mandated transport for women employees is allowed only within the statutory obligation and time limit.
Case-Laws
GST
AAR held that GST paid on leasing, renting or hiring of motor vehicles can qualify as input tax credit where the employer is under a legal obligation to provide transport and safety arrangements for women employees. Although such services are ordinarily blocked under section 17(5)(b), the proviso applies to the whole clause where the facility is mandatorily required, subject to fulfilment of section 16 conditions. The credit was confined to the extent of the statutory night-shift transport requirement under the Tamil Nadu shops and establishments framework and not to transport provided for all shifts. ITC was also held available only from 28.05.2019 onwards, subject to the statutory time limit for availment under section 16.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Member subscriptions and seminars by an association are taxable supplies; mutuality does not exclude GST under section 7(1)(aa).
Case-Laws
GST
Collection of member subscription and provision of services, including educational seminars and workshops for member doctors, fall within the definition of business under section 2(17)(e) because facilities or benefits supplied by an association to its members for consideration are expressly covered. Those member-related activities also constitute supply under section 7(1)(aa), which deems the association and its members to be separate persons and displaces the mutuality argument for GST purposes. The healthcare exemption was held inapplicable to these stand-alone member supplies, so the subscription fees and related services were taxable.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Bio-mining and site remediation services were classified under SAC 9994 but held exempt as pure municipal services.
Case-Laws
GST
Bio-mining of legacy waste, including excavation, screening, shredding, segregation, treatment and scientific disposal with dump-yard reclamation, was classified under SAC 9994 as waste treatment, disposal and site remediation services and stated to attract GST at 18%. The Authority nevertheless held the supply to Ariyalur Municipality exempt under Sl. No. 3 of Notification No. 12/2017-Central Tax because it was a pure service, involved no supply of goods, and related to municipal functions such as public health, sanitation and solid waste management entrusted under Article 243W. The separate query on the recipient's status was held outside advance ruling jurisdiction, so no ruling was given on that question.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Advance ruling jurisdiction limited to applicant's own services; recipient's application was withdrawn without merits review.
Case-Laws
GST
Advance ruling jurisdiction was found unavailable where the applicant sought rulings on transportation, leasing and grazing-related services as a recipient rather than as the supplier liable to discharge tax. The Authority noted that questions on determination of tax liability and notification applicability must relate to services undertaken or proposed to be undertaken by the applicant, and that liability to pay tax vests with the service supplier. On that basis, the application was not admissible. The applicant then requested withdrawal, and the Authority recorded the request and disposed of the application as withdrawn without examining the merits.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Composite supply of healthcare services: hospital pharmacy medicines for in-patients are exempt as part of treatment.
Case-Laws
GST
Medicines and consumables supplied by a hospital pharmacy to in-patients during diagnosis or treatment are treated as part of a composite supply of healthcare services, not as separate retail sales. The Authority states that in-patient care includes the full bundle of medical, pharmaceutical, paramedical, nursing, laboratory and allied services from admission to discharge, and that such supplies are naturally bundled with the principal healthcare service in the ordinary course of business. Applying section 8(a), the composite supply assumes the character of healthcare services and is exempt under Entry 74 of Notification No. 12/2017-C.T. (Rate); the circular on in-patient healthcare was also relied on as supporting this treatment.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

DDP export valuation includes reimbursable delivery costs in taxable supply, while refund questions fall outside advance ruling scope.
Case-Laws
GST
Under Section 15 of the CGST Act read with Section 20 of the IGST Act, transaction value for exports on DDP terms includes incidental and reimbursable expenses incurred up to delivery, because the supplier bears responsibility and risk until the buyer's designated destination. As the applicant was not a pure agent and such costs were intended to be charged to the recipient, ocean freight, insurance, foreign import duties, delivery charges and similar expenses were includible in the value of taxable supply for IGST. The Authority also held that refund is not a matter within advance ruling jurisdiction under Section 97(2), so the refund query was not admitted or answered.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =