Allahabad High Court Issues Notice On Plea Challenging S.127 CGST Act Over 'Unbridled' Power Given To Authorities To Impose Penalty On Assessee

Recently, the Allahabad High Court has issued notices to office of the Solicitor General of India and Advocate General, Uttar Pradesh in a writ petition challenging the validity of Section 127 of the Central and State Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017. Section 127 of the Central and State Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 empowers the proper officer to impose penalty when he is of the...

CCTV Footage Of Assessee's Family Cannot Be Used By GST Dept, Violates Right To Privacy: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court has issued directions safeguarding the right to privacy in GST search proceedings, stating that any family-related CCTV footage which violates the privacy of family members cannot be used or disseminated in any manner. “Some of the concerns which are raised by the Petitioners such as right to privacy of the family being violated, etc., deserve to be...

Failure To Mention Correct Value In GSTR-5A Filing Is Not Suppression U/S 74 CGST Act: Karnataka High Court

The Karnataka High Court has stated that a failure to mention the correct value in returns or apply the correct GST rate is not suppression under section 74 of the Central Goods and Services Tax (CGST). Justice S.R. Krishna Kumar stated that "...though the revenue alleged in the impugned SCN that the assessee failed to mention the value of services correctly in the GSTR-5A returns...

Rajasthan GST Act | HC Calls For 'Purposive' Interpretation Of S.107, Asks Why Assessment Orders Cannot Be Sent On Assessee's Email

The Rajasthan High Court has questioned why the tax department can send attachment orders via email, but not assessment orders, to ward off any communication gap or confusion about the date of communication.The Court was hearing a petition filed against the order of the Appellate Authority, State Tax, that had rejected an appeal preferred by the petitioner under Section 107(1) of the...

S. 67 CGST Act | Officer Below Rank Of Joint Commissioner Cannot Inspect Assessee's Premises Without Authorisation: Karnataka High Court

The Karnataka High Court has held that an officer below the rank of Joint Commissioner cannot, by himself, inspect the premises of the assessee without authorisation under Section 67 of the Central Goods and Services Tax. The bench further stated that there is no requirement to provide a copy of the authorisation and details of the order passed by the Joint Commissioner, but the...

[GST Rate-Cuts] Karnataka High Court Refuses Ex-Parte Stay On Guideline Mandating Revised MRP Stickers On Existing Stock

The Karnataka High Court on Monday refused to pass an ex-parte order staying the guideline dated September 9 issued by the Union of India mandating the declaration of revised retail sale price (MRP), on unsold stock manufactured/packed/imported, which would be effective from September 22, in addition to the existing retail sale price (MRP).Justice B M Shyam Prasad refused the ex parte...

Once Actual Movement Of Goods Proved By Assessee Remains Unrebutted, Proceedings U/S 74 GST Act Are Unjustified: Allahabad High Court

The Allahabad High Court has recently held that when the actual movement of goods has been proved by the assesee and the same remains unrebutted by the authority, proceedings under Section 74 of Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 are unjustified. Proceedings under Section 74 of GST Act can be initiated if an assesee has not paid or short paid or erroneously refunded or input tax...

IGST Act | Party Providing Services Under Bipartite Agreement Cannot Be Labelled As “Intermediary”: Rajasthan High Court

While hearing a petition against the decision of Department of Revenue by a company providing services to a foreign entity, Rajasthan High Court held that for someone to be called an “intermediary”, there had be existence of 3 parties in the contract, in the absence of which, the services rendered under a bipartite agreement could not be called “intermediary”.The division bench of...

[CGST Act] Tax Officers Expected To Know Law Laid Down By Higher Courts: Allahabad High Court

While calling for personal affidavit from Principal Secretary, Institutional Finance, Government of U.P., Lucknow explaining the conduct of the tax officers in the State in not following the orders of the High Court, the Allahabad High Court observed that the Officers must know the law. Justice Piyush Agrawal observed that “While it is expected from the citizen to know law, the...

No Refund Of Unutilised ITC On Closure Of Business U/S 54 CGST Act, Must Be Reversed U/S 29(5): Sikkim High Court

The Sikkim High Court stated that no refund of unutilised ITC (Input Tax Credit) on closure of business under section 54 CGST Act (Central Goods and Services Tax), must be reversed under section 29(5). Section 54 of the CGST Act, 2017 deals with refund of tax, intertest, or any other amount paid under GST. The refund can be claimed in case of excess tax payment, zero-rated...

[CGST Act] Absence Of Document Identification Number Doesn't Render Assessment Orders Void: Andhra Pradesh High Court

The Andhra Pradesh High Court held that absence of document identification number doesn't render assessment orders void.The bench consists of Justices R Raghunandan Rao and Sumathi Jagadam were addressing the issue where the assessee/petitioner has challenged the assessment orders passed against him. The main ground for challenge is the lack of a Document Identification Number on the...

State Gains Revenue Only If Businesses Operate; Cancelling GST Registration On Procedural Grounds Serve No Purpose: Calcutta High Court

The Calcutta High Court stated that the state gains revenue only if business operates; GST registration cancellation on procedural grounds serves no purpose. Justice Aniruddha Roy stated that the cancellation of GST registration of the assessee on the procedural ground would not enure any benefit either to the revenue authority or to the assessee. On the contrary, if the GST...