S.74(5) | GST Proceedings Can Be Closed On Payment Of 15% Pre-SCN Penalty Where Tax Already Deposited Prior To SCN: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court recently allowed Delhi Sales Corporation to deposit pre-SCN penalty contemplated under Section 74(5) of the Goods and Services Tax Act, despite issuance of show cause notice under Section 74(8).This, after a division bench of Justices Prathiba M. Singh and Shail Jain noted that the Petitioner-Corporation had already deposited tax and interest in terms of Section...

Educational Consultancy Services For Foreign Universities Qualify As Export Of Service, Entitled To GST Refund: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court has held that foreign education consultancy services to students in exchange for admission based commission from foreign universities qualify as 'export of services'.A division bench of Justices Prathiba M. Singh and Shail Jain thus held that Global Opportunities Private Limited will be entitled to claim GST refund on export of services under Section 54 of the Central...

GST | Assessee Must Be Given Personal Hearing Since SCN Lacked Reasons: Delhi High Court Quashes Demand Against Stock Broker

The Delhi High Court has set aside the demand raised against a stock broker, noting that both the show cause notice as well as the final order were bereft of any reasons, disabling the broker to make effective representation.“It is seen that the SCN actually does not give any reasons…Even the impugned order does not give any reasons,” a division bench of Justices Prathiba M. Singh and...

Suspension Of State Tax Officer For Delayed Report Unjustified When Authority Failed To Act In GST Fraud Case: Allahabad High Court

The Allahabad High Court has held that where loss is caused to the State, a State Tax Officer may not be suspended for mere delay in submitting a report. Justice Vikas Budhwar held that this would be especially impermissible in a case where the authority to act on the report in time chooses not to do so.He held that, despite the fact that the petitioner submitted the report with delay,...

GST Authorities Cannot Assume Jurisdiction For Passing Adverse Orders For Work Concluded Under VAT Regime: Allahabad High Court

The Allahabad High Court has held that GST Authorities cannot claim jurisdiction for levying tax, penalty, and interest on work that was concluded prior to the implementation of the GST Act. Notices were issued to the petitioner, a work contractor, for the Financial Year 2018-19 under the GST Act. The petitioner was unable to reply to the notices in time. Consequently, an ex-parte...

GST Department To Re-Inspect Changed Place Of Business Before GST Registration Cancellation: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court, in a matter concerning retrospective cancellation of registration despite having amended place of business, directed “The GST Department may re-inspect the new premises of the Petitioner and obtain a physical inspection report.” The Division Bench, comprising Justice Prathiba M. Singh and Justice Shail Jain stated that the officials of the GST Department...

CGST Act | Bombay High Court Stays GST Demand Order Over Delayed Service Of Showcause Notice

The Bombay High Court granted ad-interim relief to the assessee by staying the operation of a GST Demand Order The Bench of Justice B.P. Colabawalla & Amit S. Jamsandekar was hearing a writ preferred by the assessee seeking to quash the GST demand order challenging the Show Case Notice to be time barred per Section 73(2) and 73(10) of the Central Goods and Services Tax (CGST)...

Use Of Word 'Determined' In SCN Shows Pre-Determination; S.74 Invocation Unsustainable: Madras High Court Quashes GST Demand

The Madras High Court has held that using the word 'Determined' in the show cause notice (SCN) betrays an element of pre-determination on the part of the authority. The bench highlighted that the show cause notice must clearly specify whether the assessee is being charged with fraud, suppression or wilful misstatement to invoke section 74 of the Tamil Nadu Goods and Services...

Delhi High Court Grants Interim Relief To Aadhar India Over Non-Issuance Of Pre-Show Cause Notice Intimation In GST Case

The Delhi High Court, while examining whether pre-consultation prior to a GST Show Cause Notice was mandatory or discretionary, granted interim relief to Aadhar India by permitting the proceedings arising from the Show Cause Notice dated 29 November 2024 to continue, but directing that any final order passed pursuant thereto should not be given effect without further orders of...

Affidavit Of Cost Accountant In Personal Hearing Cannot Be Ignored When Facts Are Admitted By State Tax Officer: Kerala High Court

The Kerala High Court has held that an affidavit by professionals, such as a cost accountant, given during a personal hearing, cannot be ignored, especially when a state tax officer admits facts referred therein. Justice Ziyad Rahman A.A. stated that when a professional swears an affidavit before this Court, highlighting the matters that transpired during the course of the hearing,...

Cancelled GST Registration Cannot Be Restored Solely To Claim ITC Benefit U/S 16(6) CGST Act: Kerala High Court

The Kerala High Court has held that a cancelled GST registration cannot be restored solely to claim the ITC (Input Tax Credit) benefit under Section 16(6) CGST Act (Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017). Section 16(6) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, enables the taxpayer to claim the input tax credit available in the ledger, in case the order...

Centre Cannot Retain Wrongly Paid IGST Once Correct Tax Is Paid To State GST Authorities: Karnataka High Court

The Karnataka High Court has held that the Centre cannot retain wrongly paid IGST (Integrated Goods and Services Tax) once the correct tax is paid to the State authorities. Justice S.R. Krishna Kumar observed that since the assessee had wrongly paid IGST and later paid the correct tax to the State GST, the Central government must refund IGST to the assessee....