There should be application of mind by Revenue Department while passing orders, cancelling GST Registration be it physical or auto-generated.
SC set aside the condition imposed by Chhattisgarh HC, of depositing INR 70 Lakh for grant of bail in a matter of wrongful availment of ITC
HC held that, when time limit for issuance of order under Section 73(10) of CGST Act for the Financial Year 2017-18 is extended upto September 30, 2023, the only interpretation that can be placed on provisions of Section 73(2) of the CGST Act is that, the SCN can also be issued till September 30, 2023.
It is well settled that a failure of natural justice in the authority of first instance cannot be cured by sufficiency of natural justice in the appellate body, else the same would encourage the tendency of the authorities to give a short shrift to the proceedings before them.
It is sought to be submitted that no reason has been assigned for seizure of the goods and the reason assigned in the Form GST MOV-06 for seizure of the goods that the purchaser firm was not in existence and it was a fake sale and invoice, is absolutely false.
HC set aside order raising a demand of tax and penalty for release of the goods. Held that, neither SCN nor order of demand stated reasons for imposing tax liability as well as penalty.
held that the assessee cannot be penalised by demanding late fee where, assessee had not filed GST returns due to cancellation of GST Registration on factually incorrect grounds.
HC held that, seizure under Section 67 of CGST Act is limited to goods liable for confiscation or any documents, books or things which may be useful for or relevant to any proceedings and ‘cash’ does not fall within definition of ‘goods’
Under the Companies Act, 2013, the Odisha High Court rules that an assessee cannot claim a supplementary refund based on a fresh calculation after the processing of the original refund application. In Vedanta Ltd. vs. Union of India, the court states that when Input Tax Credit (ITC) is claimed for multiple units under a single GSTIN, the assessee cannot seek supplementary refund by treating each unit as a separate entity.
Prosecution case against petitioner is that he created fake firms for availment and passing of fake/ ineligible Input Tax Credit (ITC) to facilitate existing beneficiary firms.
