HC permitted assessee to rectify its GST Returns filed for the months of September 2017 and March 2018, in order to claim ITC benefit by the recipient, wherein B2C was erroneously mentioned, instead of B2B. Held that, the assessee will be unnecessarily prejudiced if it is not allowed to avail the benefits of ITC.
Held that, there is no legal justification to tax the share of clinical establishments on the ground that they have supported the commerce or business of doctors by providing infrastructure and such assertion is neither factually nor legally sustainable. Further held that, clinical establishments providing health care services are exempted from the levy of Service Tax
HC held that where an Order of Cancellation of Registration under GST Act was uploaded on GST Portal without signature, limitation for filing appeal cannot start until signature is affixed on such order.
HC held that cancellation of GST Registration due to non-filing of returns can be revoked if assessee files pending returns and pays the taxes, fines, interest along with fee due.
HC held that revocation of GST registration without any explanation and only reason that returns were filed late is not sustainable for cancellation of GST registration.
Held that, non-supply of documents referred in the ‘reason to believe’ notice along with the notice to the assessee deems the reassessment proceeding and any consequential proceedings illegal and is a flagrant violation of the principles of natural justice.
HC directed Water Resources Department to take into consideration the Representation filed by CG Associates w.r.t the refund of additional amount of GST paid by the CG Associates due to change in rate of taxes.
Hero Motocorp Ltd. Vs Union of India & Ors. (Delhi High Court) Instructions issued by Revenue Department needs to be aligned with the decisions taken by the courts and the position of law as declared by the judgments The Hon’ble Delhi High Court in M/s. Hero Motocorp Ltd. v. Union of India & Ors [Review […]
HC Held that, providing services of ‘Goods Transport Agency’ (GTA) does not fall within the category of ‘Clearing and Forwarding Agent’, provided to several recipients who were liable to discharge tax dues on freight under ‘RCM after availing permissible abatement.
HC set aside the order of cancellation of GST Registration of the assessee and held that the cancellation of the GST Registration through a non-speaking order without mentioning the grounds for such cancellation is cryptic in nature and violates the principles of natural justice.
