Neha Piyush Shah Vs Union of India (Bombay High Court)
The petition challenged an Order-in-Original dated 26 December 2023, whereby a GST demand of ₹12,66,19,880 along with interest and penalty was confirmed against the petitioner under Section 73 of the CGST Act, 2017, read with corresponding provisions of the MGST Act and IGST Act. The petitioner restricted the scope of the writ petition to the confirmation of this specific demand.
The petitioner, an individual engaged in dealing with vouchers, argued that vouchers are defined under Section 2(118) of the CGST Act as instruments accepted as consideration or part consideration for supply of goods or services. The respondent authority, however, treated dealings in vouchers as supply of goods under Section 7 of the CGST Act and imposed GST on the petitioner’s turnover.
The petitioner contended that such treatment was incorrect, particularly in light of the statutory definition of “money” under Section 2(75) of the CGST Act. It was further argued that judicial precedent had clarified the nature of voucher transactions. Reference was made to a Karnataka High Court decision, which, relying on a Supreme Court ruling, held that vouchers are akin to instruments representing value, similar to currency, and are not goods or services. The Court in that case had observed that vouchers represent pre-deposits, and taxation would arise only upon redemption when underlying goods or services are supplied, not at the stage of issuance or distribution.
