Condonation of delay in GST appeal under extended one month period leads to remand for adjudication on merits.

Condonation of delay in GST appeal under extended one month period leads to remand for adjudication on merits.Case-LawsGSTSection 107(4) of the Act allows the Appellate Authority to condone delay by permitting an appeal to be filed within an additional on

Condonation of delay in GST appeal under extended one month period leads to remand for adjudication on merits.
Case-Laws
GST
Section 107(4) of the Act allows the Appellate Authority to condone delay by permitting an appeal to be filed within an additional one month period if the appellant shows sufficient cause for missing the primary three or six month window; therefore a 15 day delay justified by non fanciful grounds cannot be defeated by a hyper technical threshold dismissal. The High Court found the respondents' insistence on an earlier cutoff date legally unsustainable, set aside the earlier order, condoned the delay, and remitted the matter to the appellate authority for adjudication on merits.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Tax determination against deceased proprietor invalid where no notice to legal representative; appeal rejected without addressing jurisdictional defect.

Tax determination against deceased proprietor invalid where no notice to legal representative; appeal rejected without addressing jurisdictional defect.Case-LawsGSTProceedings and a determination under the tax recovery provision were initiated and conclud

Tax determination against deceased proprietor invalid where no notice to legal representative; appeal rejected without addressing jurisdictional defect.
Case-Laws
GST
Proceedings and a determination under the tax recovery provision were initiated and concluded against a sole proprietor who had died before the show cause notice; the court found the proceedings defective because no notice was directed to the legal representative after death, rendering initiation and the resulting order invalid. The appellate authority rejected the subsequent appeal on limitation without addressing this jurisdictional defect; because the procedural flaw went undecided by the appellate body, the impugned order could not be sustained and the writ challenging the determination was disposed of in favour of the petitioner.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Revocation of GST registration and permission to file blocked returns; conditional defreezing of bank accounts after security and instalment application.

Revocation of GST registration and permission to file blocked returns; conditional defreezing of bank accounts after security and instalment application.Case-LawsGSTRevocation of cancelled GST registration was directed to be pursued by petitioners so they

Revocation of GST registration and permission to file blocked returns; conditional defreezing of bank accounts after security and instalment application.
Case-Laws
GST
Revocation of cancelled GST registration was directed to be pursued by petitioners so they can file blocked GSTR-1 and GSTR-3B returns; outcome: court granted liberty to apply for revocation and for permission to file returns. Petitioners may apply for payment of outstanding tax by instalments under the statutory scheme; outcome: bank accounts will be defrozen on filing such application and providing sufficient security. Security must satisfy the regional GST rule on security for tax recovery. Administrative outcome: petitioners given one week to file applications and authorities two weeks to dispose of them.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Input Tax Credit denial tied to supplier non filing of GSTR 3B; appellate order set aside for exceeding notice grounds and remanded for fresh hearing

Input Tax Credit denial tied to supplier non filing of GSTR 3B; appellate order set aside for exceeding notice grounds and remanded for fresh hearingCase-LawsGSTDenial of input tax credit was grounded solely on the supplier’s non-filing of Form GSTR-3B; w

Input Tax Credit denial tied to supplier non filing of GSTR 3B; appellate order set aside for exceeding notice grounds and remanded for fresh hearing
Case-Laws
GST
Denial of input tax credit was grounded solely on the supplier's non-filing of Form GSTR-3B; when the supplier subsequently filed returns for the disputed months the original demands were rightly dropped for those months but remained for the month still unfiled. The appellate authority relied on additional grounds not pleaded in the notice to show cause, contrary to the principle that adjudication must remain within the confines of the notice. Because adjudication on extraneous grounds breaches the obligation to afford a hearing on those grounds, the appellate order was set aside and the matter remitted for fresh decision after affording an opportunity to be heard.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Right to access seized electronic evidence: impugned adjudication treated as additional show cause notice, remand for fresh hearing and return of materials.

Right to access seized electronic evidence: impugned adjudication treated as additional show cause notice, remand for fresh hearing and return of materials.Case-LawsGSTRight to access seized documents and electronic evidence requires that the adjudicating

Right to access seized electronic evidence: impugned adjudication treated as additional show cause notice, remand for fresh hearing and return of materials.
Case-Laws
GST
Right to access seized documents and electronic evidence requires that the adjudicating authority provide the affected party a meaningful opportunity to participate; absence of returned seized material prevented effective defence and appeal. The impugned adjudication is treated as an additional show cause notice, and the authority must hand over seized documents or copies and the seized CPU, allow a two week composite reply period from receipt, and conclude proceedings after affording an opportunity of hearing. The court remanded the matter for fresh adjudication and left all merits open to the adjudicating authority.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Limitation and rectification under UPGST Act: appeals held maintainable despite delay where rectification was sought and deposits made.

Limitation and rectification under UPGST Act: appeals held maintainable despite delay where rectification was sought and deposits made.Case-LawsGSTAbeyance of limitation applies where a rectification application under the GST statute was pending; the time

Limitation and rectification under UPGST Act: appeals held maintainable despite delay where rectification was sought and deposits made.
Case-Laws
GST
Abeyance of limitation applies where a rectification application under the GST statute was pending; the time spent pursuing rectification is excluded and the appeal is maintainable despite delay, the Court applying the principle of bona fide pursuit before a wrong forum and directing the appellate authority to decide on merits. Because the petitioner deposited 10% in the leading matter and 25% in the connected matter, the appeals are to be treated as not barred by delay, and the appellate authority must decide them on merits within two months. Writ petitions disposed accordingly.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Presumption of constitutionality for subordinate legislation and board directions under CGST act; challenged circular upheld, summons rescheduled.

Presumption of constitutionality for subordinate legislation and board directions under CGST act; challenged circular upheld, summons rescheduled.Case-LawsGSTA High Court reaffirmed the presumption of constitutionality for subordinate legislation and held

Presumption of constitutionality for subordinate legislation and board directions under CGST act; challenged circular upheld, summons rescheduled.
Case-Laws
GST
A High Court reaffirmed the presumption of constitutionality for subordinate legislation and held that the central board may issue orders, instructions, or directions to Central Tax Officers to secure uniform implementation; those officers and implementation staff must follow them. The court accepted that assignment of functions to Central Tax Officers may be proposed by the Commissioner in the Board and approved by the Board, and therefore found no basis to invalidate the challenged administrative circular dated 5 July 2017. The writ petition was partly allowed only to reschedule compliance with a summons to a new date, and the challenge to the circular was dismissed.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Service by uploading on GST portal may be insufficient; officer must use alternative modes, remand allowed subject to deposit.

Service by uploading on GST portal may be insufficient; officer must use alternative modes, remand allowed subject to deposit.Case-LawsGSTWhen a tax notice was uploaded only on the GST portal and the recipient did not receive the original, the uploading w

Service by uploading on GST portal may be insufficient; officer must use alternative modes, remand allowed subject to deposit.
Case-Laws
GST
When a tax notice was uploaded only on the GST portal and the recipient did not receive the original, the uploading was held insufficient to afford an effective personal hearing; the issuing officer must explore alternative modes of service (including registered post with acknowledgment) before proceeding ex parte. The impugned assessment was set aside for lack of opportunity of hearing and the matter remanded for fresh consideration, subject to the condition that the taxpayer deposit 25% of the disputed tax within four weeks; the setting aside takes effect from the date of that payment.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Rectification and assessment dispute: conditional bank attachment vacated after 25% deposit; appeal may be decided on merits.

Rectification and assessment dispute: conditional bank attachment vacated after 25% deposit; appeal may be decided on merits.Case-LawsGSTRectification proceedings and assessment dispute concerning a tax demand were addressed by conditioning interim relief

Rectification and assessment dispute: conditional bank attachment vacated after 25% deposit; appeal may be decided on merits.
Case-Laws
GST
Rectification proceedings and assessment dispute concerning a tax demand were addressed by conditioning interim relief on a partial deposit: the taxpayer must deposit 25% of the disputed tax and have no other outstanding tax arrears for the bank attachment to be vacated. The appellate authority is permitted to decide the statutory appeal on merits even if limitation issues exist, provided the appeal is filed within the prescribed period. Failure to comply with the stipulated conditions permits the tax authority to resume recovery as if the petition were dismissed. Writ petition disposed accordingly.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST registration amendment after corporate insolvency management change – tribunal-approved management requires reconsideration and restoration opportunity.

GST registration amendment after corporate insolvency management change – tribunal-approved management requires reconsideration and restoration opportunity.Case-LawsGSTHigh Court reviewed refusal to amend and cancellation of GST registration after a corpo

GST registration amendment after corporate insolvency management change – tribunal-approved management requires reconsideration and restoration opportunity.
Case-Laws
GST
High Court reviewed refusal to amend and cancellation of GST registration after a corporate insolvency resolution process placed new management. The court found the tax authority had proceeded on the incorrect premise that the old management remained in control despite the tribunal-approved change, quashed the impugned orders dated 13.11.2025 and 14.11.2025, and directed reconsideration of the petitioner's amendment application dated 03.11.2025. The authority must re-evaluate the registration amendment and objections and pass fresh orders within three weeks, restoring the petitioner's opportunity to operate under the new management.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Profiteering over input tax credit and price reduction sent for re-investigation while limitation objections are examined

Profiteering over input tax credit and price reduction sent for re-investigation while limitation objections are examinedCase-LawsGSTAllegations concern whether a supplier passed the benefit of input tax credit to purchasers by reducing prices; this requi

Profiteering over input tax credit and price reduction sent for re-investigation while limitation objections are examined
Case-Laws
GST
Allegations concern whether a supplier passed the benefit of input tax credit to purchasers by reducing prices; this requires verification of documentary evidence and calculation of the claimed Rs.173 per buyer and alleged Rs.32.78 per sq ft profiteering. Limitation objections under sections governing recovery of tax were raised by the respondent and must be examined against the investigative record. The Appellate Tribunal directed re investigation by the DGAP under the procedural rule for further factual and accounting scrutiny to determine if a commensurate price reduction was effected and whether statutory time limit defenses bar recovery.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Reassessment against a deceased assessee: procedural defect mandates fresh reassessment; nonresponsive petitioner may be treated as legal representative.

Reassessment against a deceased assessee: procedural defect mandates fresh reassessment; nonresponsive petitioner may be treated as legal representative.Case-LawsGSTReassessment initiated after the assessee’s death is a jurisdictional defect when proceedi

Reassessment against a deceased assessee: procedural defect mandates fresh reassessment; nonresponsive petitioner may be treated as legal representative.
Case-Laws
GST
Reassessment initiated after the assessee's death is a jurisdictional defect when proceedings continue against a deceased person; the assessment and consequential notices in such circumstances must be set aside and reassessment may be re-initiated only after complying with statutory formalities. Where the Revenue lacked knowledge of death at the time notice was issued, discovery of death requires corrective procedural steps. If a written request to identify legal representatives and heirs is ignored for seven days, the Revenue may treat the petitioner as the deceased's legal representative and proceed against that petitioner, with such proceedings not being vulnerable for nonimpleading other heirs.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Rectification under GST Act: procedural failure to verify portal ITC reconciliation and denial of hearing led to remand for fresh disposal and hearing

Rectification under GST Act: procedural failure to verify portal ITC reconciliation and denial of hearing led to remand for fresh disposal and hearingCase-LawsGSTRectification of GST records was challenged on grounds that an application seeking correction

Rectification under GST Act: procedural failure to verify portal ITC reconciliation and denial of hearing led to remand for fresh disposal and hearing
Case-Laws
GST
Rectification of GST records was challenged on grounds that an application seeking correction and reconciliation of input tax credit (ITC) was rejected without affording an opportunity of hearing and without verifying uploaded portal records. The court found the rejection procedurally defective for not recording reasons for disregarding submitted reconciliation statements and supporting documents, and for failing to provide a personal hearing; therefore the rejection order was set aside. The matter is remanded for fresh disposal of the rectification application, with directions to consider portal evidence, allow the applicant to present documents and explanations, and hear the applicant within a specified short period.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST reverse charge and import of services bail granted where offences are triable by Magistrate and detention prolonged

GST reverse charge and import of services bail granted where offences are triable by Magistrate and detention prolongedCase-LawsGSTRegular bail was granted in GST criminal proceedings concerning import of services and IGST under reverse charge because the

GST reverse charge and import of services bail granted where offences are triable by Magistrate and detention prolonged
Case-Laws
GST
Regular bail was granted in GST criminal proceedings concerning import of services and IGST under reverse charge because the offences are triable by a Magistrate, attract limited punishment, and allegations rest on documentary evidence; consequence: petitioners released on bail. The court held absence of fraud in the arrest memo and prolonged detention (about six months) weighed in favour of liberty; consequence: bail extended despite ongoing investigation. The court noted that further investigation or filing of a supplementary complaint is not a bar to bail without specific justification; consequence: continued probe did not defeat bail. The requirement to complete assessment before prosecution is generally required but admits narrow exceptions.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST registration cancellation quashed – restoration granted subject to discharge of pending tax liability under Tvl.Suguna precedent.

GST registration cancellation quashed – restoration granted subject to discharge of pending tax liability under Tvl.Suguna precedent.Case-LawsGSTQuashing of GST registration cancellation was ordered and the registration directed to be restored, subject to

GST registration cancellation quashed – restoration granted subject to discharge of pending tax liability under Tvl.Suguna precedent.
Case-Laws
GST
Quashing of GST registration cancellation was ordered and the registration directed to be restored, subject to the petitioner discharging outstanding tax arrears as a condition precedent under the Tvl. Suguna authority; the court relied on that precedent to require payment and reporting of tax liability before restoration. The impugned cancellation in Form GST REG-13 was set aside, and restoration was conditioned on compliance with the directions in the cited precedent. Allegations of suppression of material fact were noted in the proceeding.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST liability on mandated contributions to DMF and NMET under MMDR Act: DMF exempted; NMET held taxable.

GST liability on mandated contributions to DMF and NMET under MMDR Act: DMF exempted; NMET held taxable.Case-LawsGSTQuestions not raised before the lower authority were not entertained. The authority found that statutory payments mandated by the MMDR Act

GST liability on mandated contributions to DMF and NMET under MMDR Act: DMF exempted; NMET held taxable.
Case-Laws
GST
Questions not raised before the lower authority were not entertained. The authority found that statutory payments mandated by the MMDR Act (30% of royalty to DMF; 2% to NMET) arise from mining activity and form part of royalty paid in the course or furtherance of business. Applying CBEC clarification, contributions to the District Mineral Foundation (DMF) are not subject to GST, and the appeal on DMF is allowed (no refunds). Contributions to the National Mineral Exploration Trust (NMET) are not exempted by that clarification and remain taxable; the lower ruling on NMET is upheld.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Bharat Law House Pvt. Ltd. Launches Three Power-Packed Books, Authored by Adv. Suresh Sharma and Adv. Varun Sharma

Bharat Law House Pvt. Ltd. Launches Three Power-Packed Books, Authored by Adv. Suresh Sharma and Adv. Varun SharmaGSTDated:- 5-2-2026PTIMumbai (Maharashtra) [India], February 05: A significant literary and professional milestone was marked on January 31,

Bharat Law House Pvt. Ltd. Launches Three Power-Packed Books, Authored by Adv. Suresh Sharma and Adv. Varun Sharma
GST
Dated:- 5-2-2026
PTI
Mumbai (Maharashtra) [India], February 05: A significant literary and professional milestone was marked on January 31, 2026, with the grand launch of three books published by Bharat Law House Pvt. Ltd., including two landmark GST titles and The First-Generation Lawyer. The event, held in Fortune Select Exotica – Member ITC HotelsÂ’ Group, Navi Mumbai from 5:30 PM to 8:30 PM, brought together an eminent gathering of dignitaries, legal professionals, chartered accountants, and business leaders to celebrate definitive new contributions to GST law and practice. The event was hosted by Mr. Ravi Pu

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ney-Laundering Act, 2002) – Law & Practice The event also featured the Authors: • Advocate Suresh Sharma – Practitioner in Tax Litigation • Advocate Varun Sharma – Practitioner in Tax Litigation The Chief Guest and Honorary Guests shared their perspectives on the evolving GST framework, enforcement challenges, and the importance of practical legal understanding for professionals and businesses.
The evening marked the launch of three significant legal publications by Bharat Law House Pvt. Ltd., united by one shared professional journey, the evolution of legal practice from courtroom expertise to lived experience.
The two GST-focused titles, authored by Adv. Suresh Sharma and Adv. Varun Sharma, offers definitive, practice-oriented insight

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Late fee and general penalty under GST: court dropped general penalty but confirmed substantial late fee subject to compliance

Late fee and general penalty under GST: court dropped general penalty but confirmed substantial late fee subject to complianceCase-LawsGSTImposition of a general penalty where concurrent assessment orders exist was held arbitrary under the doctrine agains

Late fee and general penalty under GST: court dropped general penalty but confirmed substantial late fee subject to compliance
Case-Laws
GST
Imposition of a general penalty where concurrent assessment orders exist was held arbitrary under the doctrine against double punishment; consequence: the general penalty of Rs.50,000 was set aside. The liability for late fee was sustained on merits and the petitioner was directed to pay Rs.1,67,200 within 30 days; consequence: on compliance the impugned assessment order and recovery proceedings will be quashed and dropped immediately. Failure to comply permits recovery as if the petition were dismissed. Writ Petition disposed accordingly.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Pre-deposit requirement for GST tax dispute and bank attachment vacated subject to 25% deposit and setoff

Pre-deposit requirement for GST tax dispute and bank attachment vacated subject to 25% deposit and setoffCase-LawsGSTCourt exercised discretionary relief despite expiry of limitation under Section 107 by quashing and remitting the tax order for fresh adju

Pre-deposit requirement for GST tax dispute and bank attachment vacated subject to 25% deposit and setoff
Case-Laws
GST
Court exercised discretionary relief despite expiry of limitation under Section 107 by quashing and remitting the tax order for fresh adjudication on merits. The writ is disposed subject to the petitioner depositing 25% of the disputed tax as a pre-deposit condition for de novo proceedings; bank attachment is ordered to be vacated on compliance and provided no other arrears exist. Amounts already recovered or paid will be verified and set off against the 25% pre-deposit; if recovered amounts exceed 25% no further payment is required. Noncompliance permits respondents to resume recovery as if the writ were dismissed.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Limitation for tax recovery under Section 73 remitted for fresh adjudication subject to 50% predeposit and lifting attachment

Limitation for tax recovery under Section 73 remitted for fresh adjudication subject to 50% predeposit and lifting attachmentCase-LawsGSTLimitation for issuance of a tax recovery order under Section 73 was considered alongside an extension by notification

Limitation for tax recovery under Section 73 remitted for fresh adjudication subject to 50% predeposit and lifting attachment
Case-Laws
GST
Limitation for issuance of a tax recovery order under Section 73 was considered alongside an extension by notification; because the impugned order was ex parte after the petitioner failed to reply to the show cause notice, the court remitted the matter for fresh adjudication on merits. The respondent must give notice before passing any fresh order. Proceeding will continue only if the petitioner deposits 50% of the disputed tax in cash or from its electronic cash ledger within 30 days; bank attachment will be lifted upon that deposit, and failure to comply permits recovery as if the petition were dismissed.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST rate reduction on instant noodles found profiteering; Rs90.9 lakh directed to Consumer Welfare Fund, no interest or penalty

GST rate reduction on instant noodles found profiteering; Rs90.9 lakh directed to Consumer Welfare Fund, no interest or penaltyCase-LawsGSTInvoice-wise comparison found a rebuttable presumption of profiteering following a GST rate reduction on specified s

GST rate reduction on instant noodles found profiteering; Rs90.9 lakh directed to Consumer Welfare Fund, no interest or penalty
Case-Laws
GST
Invoice-wise comparison found a rebuttable presumption of profiteering following a GST rate reduction on specified snack products; the DGAP report quantified profiteering at Rs. 90,90,310 for 15.11.2017-31.12.2018 and that amount must be deposited equally into the Consumer Welfare Fund. Interest was not imposed because the rule authorising 18% interest became effective on 28.06.2019 and fiscal additions are not to be applied retrospectively (per SC precedent), so no interest is directed. Penalty under the penal provision was not imposed because that provision came into force on 01.01.2020 and cannot be applied retroactively.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Challenge to show cause notice under GST — court refuses preadjudication interference, preserves crossexamination and rebuttal rights

Challenge to show cause notice under GST court refuses preadjudication interference, preserves crossexamination and rebuttal rightsCase-LawsGSTA challenge to a show cause notice under the GST framework raises disputed factual issues best resolved in adju

Challenge to show cause notice under GST court refuses preadjudication interference, preserves crossexamination and rebuttal rights
Case-Laws
GST
A challenge to a show cause notice under the GST framework raises disputed factual issues best resolved in adjudication; accordingly, preadjudication interference is declined. The petitioner need not be compelled to deposit proposed amounts before adjudication. Statements of recipients recorded in investigation may be relied upon by revenue, but the petitioner is entitled to crossexamine those witnesses before any adverse inference is drawn; that right will be afforded. Documentary records relied on by revenue may be challenged for reliability and the petitioner has the right to rebut inferences drawn from such documents. Facts and law must be determined during adjudication.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Entitlement to input tax credit despite limitation due to retrospective amendment; orders based solely on limitation quashed and recovery restrained

Entitlement to input tax credit despite limitation due to retrospective amendment; orders based solely on limitation quashed and recovery restrainedCase-LawsGSTEntitlement to input tax credit was upheld despite limitation under the former provision becaus

Entitlement to input tax credit despite limitation due to retrospective amendment; orders based solely on limitation quashed and recovery restrained
Case-Laws
GST
Entitlement to input tax credit was upheld despite limitation under the former provision because a retrospective amendment inserting Section 16(5) governs eligibility; accordingly, assessment orders that denied ITC solely on limitation grounds are quashed insofar as claims fall within the period prescribed by Section 16(5) and the respondent is restrained from initiating proceedings based only on limitation. Petitioners may apply separately for refund and the Department must decide on merits. Bank accounts frozen under the impugned order must be defrozen and amounts collected may be refunded or adjusted in tax ledgers. The Department retains liberty to pursue cases on merits where fraudulent, wrong or excess ITC claims are alleged.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Requirement to quantify interest in show cause notices under GST leads to quashing of unquantified notice and demand

Requirement to quantify interest in show cause notices under GST leads to quashing of unquantified notice and demandCase-LawsGSTShow cause notices must quantify interest liability before demanding it; failure to quantify interest for the specified period

Requirement to quantify interest in show cause notices under GST leads to quashing of unquantified notice and demand
Case-Laws
GST
Show cause notices must quantify interest liability before demanding it; failure to quantify interest for the specified period in the notice violated the statutory requirement and rendered both the notice and subsequent adjudication order invalid. The court distinguished liability quantified in orders from liability that must be specified in notices, holding that provisions addressing unquantified interest in orders do not cure an unquantified notice. Consequently the impugned notice and demand were quashed, with liberty for tax authorities to issue a fresh, properly quantified show cause notice and proceed in accordance with law.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Provisional attachment of bank accounts: expiry after one year and need for specific order; relief granted to petitioner.

Provisional attachment of bank accounts: expiry after one year and need for specific order; relief granted to petitioner.Case-LawsGSTProvisional attachment under the Act expires after one year, and an attachment directed by reference to a PAN does not aut

Provisional attachment of bank accounts: expiry after one year and need for specific order; relief granted to petitioner.
Case-Laws
GST
Provisional attachment under the Act expires after one year, and an attachment directed by reference to a PAN does not automatically operate on a separate savings bank account absent a specific attachment order for that account; consequently the provisional attachment in relation to the petitioner's savings account is nonoperational as the oneyear period has lapsed. The High Court held that no justifying order specifically attaching the savings account appears on record, and therefore partly allowed the petition and disposed of pending applications accordingly.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =