GST
Impleadment Of GST Authorities Not Permissible In Proceedings U/S 9 Of IBC Merely Due To Allegations Of Bogus Invoices: NCLT Allahabad
The National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), Allahabad Bench of Shri Praveen Gupta, (Hon'ble Member Judicial) and Shri Ashish Verma (Hon'ble Member Technical) has held that impleadment of the GST Authorities in proceedings under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC), is not permissible merely on the ground that the invoices on which the petition is based have...
Failure To Notify GST Commissioner About Partner's Retirement Makes Ex-Partner Liable For Firm's GST: Punjab & Haryana High Court
The Punjab and Haryana High Court stated that failure to notify commissioner of partner's retirement makes former partner liable for firm's GST. Section 90 of the CGST Act, 2017 extends the liability in case of partnership firm to its partners as well. Justices Lisa Gill and Sudeepti Sharma stated that “intimation of retirement of partner has to be given to the Commissioner...
Trader Can't Be Labelled Defaulter Over Unpaid Demand During Pendency Of GST Appeal, After Making Pre-Deposit: Delhi High Court
The Delhi HIgh Court has held that once a trader prefers an appeal against a demand raised by the GST Department and makes the mandatory pre-deposit, the demand order is automatically stayed and the trader cannot be treated as a defaulter.A division bench of Justices Prathiba M. Singh and Rajneesh Kumar Gupta thus granted relief to the Petitioner-proprietorship firm and directed the Department...
Phrase 'Three Months' U/S 73(2) GST Act Means Three Calendar Months, Not 90 Days: Delhi High Court
The Delhi High Court has held that the 'three months' period prior to expiry of three years within which show cause notice for alleged wrongful availment of Input Tax Credit must be issued under Section 73 of the CGST Act, means three calendar months and not 90 days.Under Section 73, SCN is issued to an assessee for determination of tax not paid or short paid. The Proper Officer is required...
GST Refund Can't Be Granted To Trader Until Cancelled Registration Is Restored: Delhi High Court
The Delhi High Court has made it clear that GST refund cannot be granted to a trader whose GST registration stands cancelled.In the case at hand, the Petitioner's registration was cancelled in February 2023 with retrospective effect from July 2018.In this backdrop a division bench of Justices Prathiba M. Singh and Shail Jain observed,“When the GST registration itself has been cancelled in...
Let GST Council Look Into Tracking Of GST Paid On Foreign OIDAR Services : Supreme Court
The Supreme Court recently disposed of a public interest litigation seeking directions for setting up a mechanism to track services provided by foreign entities in India under the Goods and Services Tax (GST) regime. A bench of Justice BV Nagarathna and Justice KV Viswanathan passed the order after briefly hearing Advocate Charu Mathur, who appeared for the petitioner.During the hearing,...
S.74 CGST Act | Consolidated SCN For Multiple Financial Years Necessary To Establish Wrongful Availment Of ITC: Delhi High Court
The Delhi High Court has held that consolidated show cause notice under Section 74 of the CGST is not only permissible but necessary, to unearth wrongful availment of ITC over a span of period.A division bench of Justices Prathiba M. Singh and Rajneesh Kumar Gupta observed,“The nature of ITC is such that fraudulent utilization and availment of the same cannot be established on most...
Delhi High Court Reprimands GST Dept For Raiding Lawyer's Office, Seizing Computer Over Client's Tax Case
The Delhi High Court has pulled up the GST Department for harassing a tax lawyer, by raiding his offices and seizing his files and electronic gadgets, in connection with alleged GST evasion by one of his clients.A division bench of Justices Prathiba M. Singh and Shail Jain observed that unless the Department has some material to indicate the lawyer's involvement in alleged tax evasion, it...
[CGST Act] Penalty Is An 'Additional Tax', Cannot Be Levied Under State Act Without 'Charging Provision': J&K&L High Court
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court has ruled that the penalty under the Central Sales Tax Act cannot be imposed by invoking provisions of the State Act in the absence of an express charging section.The Court held that the Central Act is a “self-contained code” and provides its own framework for imposition of penalties, which cannot be supplemented by state laws.A bench headed...
Karnataka High Court Directs GST Department To Establish Tracking System For Notices Sent To Taxpayers Via Email
The Karnataka High Court has directed the GST department to establish tracking system for notices sent to the taxpayers via email Justice Suraj Govindaraj stated that it is required for the department to establish a system to ascertain delivery of e-mail notices, when the said e-mail was opened and when the email was read. In this case, the assessee/petitioner has challenged...
IGST Not Leviable On Secondment Of Employee From Overseas Group Companies: Karnataka High Court
The Karnataka High Court held that IGST is not leviable on secondment arrangement with overseas entities. Justice Sachin Shankar Magadum was addressing the issue of whether a secondment constitutes a taxable supply of manpower services or a non-taxable employer-employee relationship exempt under Schedule III of the CGST Act. In this case, the during the period from July 2017 to...







![[CGST Act] Penalty Is An Additional Tax, Cannot Be Levied Under State Act Without Charging Provision: J&K&L High Court [CGST Act] Penalty Is An Additional Tax, Cannot Be Levied Under State Act Without Charging Provision: J&K&L High Court](https://www.livelaw.in/h-upload/2025/06/10/500x300_604075-sanjeev-kumar-sanjay-parihar.webp)

