GST
If SCN Is Issued Without GST Authority's Signature, Demand Order Can't Be Saved Even If It Is Signed: Jharkhand High Court
The Jharkhand High Court has made it clear that an order raising GST demand cannot be saved even if it is properly authenticated by the issuing authority, if the show cause notice preceding it was not signed.A division bench of Chief Justice M.S. Ramachandra Rao and Justice Rajesh Shankar was dealing with a Petitioner's grievance that Form GST DRC-01A issued to him under section 73(1) of...
Two Contradictory GST Orders On Same Allegations Not Sustainable: Kerala High Court
The Kerala High Court has stated that two contradictory GST orders on the same allegations are not sustainable, and the second order cannot exist if the first one already dropped the proceedings. The Bench of Justice Ziyad Rahman A.A. observed that the proceedings were dropped in the first order after accepting the explanation by the assessee, yet a second order was passed on the...
Amount Deposited Under Protest Can't Be Treated As Admission Of Tax Liability: Himachal Pradesh High Court
The Himachal Pradesh High Court has held that when a taxpayer deposits an amount “under protest”, it does not amount to an admission of tax liability.A Division Bench of Justice Tarlok Singh Chauhan and Justice Sushil Kukreja observed as follows; “Once the petitioner had deposited the amount 'under protest', the same could not have been considered to be an admission of liability because...
Design & Engineering Services To Foreign Entities Are Zero-Rated Supplies; Assessee Eligible For Refund Of Unutilized ITC U/S 54 Of CGST Act: Bombay HC
The Bombay High Court stated that design and engineering services to foreign entities are zero-rated supplies; assessee eligible for refund of unutilized ITC U/S 54 CGST. The Division Bench of Justices B.P. Colabawalla and Firdosh P. Pooniwalla observed that assessee is not an agency of the foreign recipient and both are independent and distinct persons. Thus, condition (v)...
GST | Separate Demands For Reversal Of Availed ITC & Utilisation Of ITC Is Prima Facie Duplication Of Demand: Delhi High Court
The Delhi High Court has observed that demand raised against an assessee qua reversal of availed Input Tax Credit (ITC) and qua utilisation of ITC prima facie constitutes double demand.A division bench of Justices Prathiba M. Singh and Rajneesh Kumar Gupta thus granted liberty to the Petitioner-assessee to approach the Appellate Authority against such demand, and waived predeposit qua demand...
Omission Of Rule 96(10) Of CGST Rules Operates Prospectively But Applies To All Pending Proceedings: Gujarat High Court
The Gujarat High Court stated that omission of Rule 96(10) Of CGST Rules, 2017 operates prospectively but applies to all pending proceedings. The Division Bench of Justices Bhargav D. Karia and D.N. Ray was addressing the issue where a group of petitions have challenged the vires of Rule 96(10) of the Central/State Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017 as substituted by the Central...
Cash Credit Account Cannot Be Treated As Property Of Account Holder Which Can Be Considered U/S 83 Of GST Act: Bombay High Court
The Bombay High Court stated that cash credit account cannot be treated as property of account holder which can be consider under Section 83 of GST Act. The Division Bench of Justices M.S. Sonak and Jitendra Jain observed that the phrase 'including bank account' following the phrase, “any property” would mean a non-cash-credit bank account. Therefore, a “cash credit...
Assessee Is Permitted To Rectify GSTR 3B On Par With Contents Of GSTR 1: Patna High Court
The Patna High Court stated that the assessee is permitted to rectify GSTR 3B on par with contents of GSTR 1. The Division Bench of Justices P.B. Bajanthri and S.B. PD. Singh observed that in the government, there is no system of rectification of any return once it is filed. However, the assessee had submitted application to rectify GST 3B on par with the GSTR 1 relating to certain...
S.161 CGST Act | Rectification Order Must Be Reasoned, Adverse Order Can Be Passed Only After Hearing Party: Delhi High Court
The Delhi High Court has made it clear that an order in rectification proceedings must be reasoned, passed after affording an opportunity of hearing to the party.A division bench of Justices Prathiba M. Singh and Rajneesh Kumar Gupta made the observation while dealing with a petition against rejection of Petitioner's application seeking rectification of impugned demand orderPetitioner pointed...
Allahabad High Court Rejects Patanjali's Plea Against ₹273.5 Crore GST Penalty
The Allahabad High Court has directed continuation of proceedings under Section 122 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 against M/s Patanjali Ayurved limited's 3 plants even though proceedings under Section 74 of the Act have been dropped against them.The bench of Justice Shekhar B. Saraf and Justice Vipin Chandra Dixit held “Under the present GST regime, persons who are not...
Issuance Of Show Cause Notice U/s 74 Of CGST Act Does Not Imply Violation Of Natural Justice: Himachal Pradesh High Court
Section 74: Determination of tax not paid or erroneously refunded or input tax credit wrongly availed or utilised by reason of fraud or any wilful-misstatement or suppression of facts.Himachal Pradesh High Court held that when a show cause notice is issued under Section 74 Of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, the matter is still at a preliminary stage, and objections can't be raised on...
12% IGST Is Leviable On Imported 'Lemoneez' Drink: CESTAT
The Kolkata Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has stated that 12% IGST is leviable on imported 'Lemoneez'. The Bench of Ashok Jindal (Judicial Member) and K. Anpazhakan (Technical Member) was addressing the issue of whether 'Lemoneez' is appropriately classifiable under residuary item 2106 90 19 as a soft drink concentrate [under miscellaneous...