Orders Under Omitted Rule 96(10) Of CGST Rule, 2017 Post 8th Oct, 2024 Not Valid; No Savings Clause: Uttarakhand High Court

The Uttarakhand High Court stated that orders passed under omitted Rule 96(10) Of CGST Rule, 2017 post 8th Oct, 2024 is not valid. The Division Bench of Chief Justice G. Narendar and Justice Alok Mahra stated that there was no scope for the department to pass any order by invoking the provisions of rule 96(10) of CGST Rule, 2017 after the same was omitted on 8th October, 2024 without...

Once Input Tax Credit Is Wrongfully Availed Due To Fraud Or Suppression, State Officer Can Issue Notice Even Without Central Action: Patna HC

The Patna High Court has upheld a tax assessment order passed by the State GST Authority, clarifying that once a Proper Officer determines that input tax credit has been wrongfully availed or utilized due to fraud or suppression of facts, they are empowered to issue a notice under Section 74(1) of the CGST/BGST Act, 2017. A Division Bench comprising Justice Rajeev Ranjan Prasad and...

Penalty U/S 122(1A) Of CGST Act Can Be Imposed On Both Taxable And Non-Taxable Person: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court has held that the penalty for GST evasion contemplated under Section 122(1A) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act 2017, can be imposed on 'any person'— whether taxable or non-taxable.A division bench of Justices Prathiba M. Singh and Rajneesh Kumar Gupta thus differed from the Bombay High Court's decision in Amit Manilal Haria V. The Joint Commissioner of CGST &...

GST Inspection Not Legally Sustainable Without Compliance With S.67 Of CGST Act & S.100 CrPC: Patna HC Quashes ₹88.64 Lakh Tax Demand

The Patna High Court, while allowing a petition challenging a tax demand of ₹88,64,550.50, has observed that an inspection conducted under the BGST/CGST regime is legally unsustainable if not carried out in compliance with Section 67 of the BGST/CGST Act, 2017 read with Section 100 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. According to Section 67 of BGST/CGST Act, 2017, an inspection to...

GST Dept Expected To Empathetically Consider Assessees' Requests To Adjourn Personal Hearing On Medical Grounds: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court has observed that the Goods and Services Tax authorities are expected to empathetically consider an assessee's request for adjournment of personal hearing on medical grounds.A division bench of Justices Prathiba M. Singh and Rajneesh Kumar Gupta said the Department should not proceed to pass adverse orders in such matters.The development comes in a petition filed by...

Rule 86A CGST Rules | Credit Ledger Can't Be Blocked For More Than One Year : Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court has ordered unblocking of an enterprise's Electronic Credit Ledger following the lapse of one year since its initial blocking.In doing so, a division bench of Justices Prathiba M. Singh and Rajneesh Kumar Gupta cited Rule 86A of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017 which lays down the conditions of use of amount available in electronic credit ledger. It...

Delhi High Court Denies Relief To Firm Allegedly Involved In ₹550 Crore GST Fraud, Questions Its Conduct Before Dept

The Delhi High Court refused to entertain a writ petition filed by a Noida based firm allegedly involved in GST fraud of over Rs. 550 crores.In doing so, a division bench of Justices Prathiba M. Singh and Rajneesh Kumar Gupta were unappreciative of the Petitioner's conduct in responding to the Department's proceedings.A demand of over ₹550 crores has been raised from various firms including...

GST | Bail Should Be Normally Granted For Offences Under S 132 CGST Act Unless Extraordinary Circumstances Exists : Supreme Court

The Supreme Court recently expressed surprise at the High Court and the Magistrate Court denying bail to a person accused of committing offences under Section 132 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act.The Court observed that in cases like this, bail should normally be granted. The offences alleged against the appellant were under Clauses (c), (f) and (h) of Section 132(1) of the Central...

Lawyers Running Individual Practice Exempt From Levy Of GST, Service Tax: Orissa High Court

The Orissa High Court has reminded the GST and Service tax authorities not to harass practicing lawyers by issuing them notices for levy of GST or service tax.A Chief Justice Harish Tandon and Justice BP Routray thus quashed the notices issued to a Bhubaneswar based lawyer demanding service tax of Rs.2,14,600/- and penalty of Rs.2,34,600/- plus interest.It observed, “in view of the...

SCN Uploaded On 'Additional Notices' Tab Of GST Portal Not Proper: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court has made it clear that uploading of show cause notice by the GST department under the 'additional notices' tab on its portal is not proper as the assessee may miss it.The decision is a contrast to a coordinate bench decision rendered in July last year, holding that uploading of notices under the heading 'additional notices' amounts to sufficient service.A division bench...

Order U/S 75(6) Of GST Act Must Be Self-Contained, Mere References To SCNs Is Not Sufficient: Allahabad High Court

The Allahabad High Court has held that order under Section 75(6) of the Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 must be self-contained and mere reference to previous show cause notices is not sufficient. Section 75 of the GST Act is a general provision relating to determination of tax. Section 75(6) of the GST Act provides that “the proper officer, in his order, shall set out the...

Provisions Of Section 26E SARFAESI Act & Section 34 RDB Act Prevails Over Section 24 Of TNGST Act: Madras High Court

The Madras High Court stated that provisions of Section 26E of the SARFAESI Act and Section 34 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act would prevail over the provisions of Section 24 of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act. The Division Bench of Justices Anita Sumanth and G. Arul Murugan observed that “in the juxtaposition of Section 26E of the SARFAESI Act with Section 34 of...