"Nipun Arora is a Chartered Accountant in practice having more than 9 years of experience in Indirect Taxation advisory, litigation and GST implementation process. He has advised various domestic and multinational clients on crucial aspects of Indirect taxes and has assisted in strategic execution of complex transactions. Additionally, he has also assisted clients in representing their cases before various tax forums."
Court held that tax authorities cannot refuse ITC refund to SEZ units merely because related precedent is under challenge. Until reversed, Britannia remains binding and must be followed.
The Court held that supplies made before 18 July 2022 were eligible for the 12% concessional GST rate, as withdrawal of benefit applied prospectively. Taxpayers can file rectification applications under Section 161 to correct such errors.
Chhattisgarh High Court set aside a GST demand of Rs 5 Cr, ruling the amount violated Section 75(7) of the GST Act by exceeding the SCN’s stated liability.
Jharkhand High Court in Maa Kalyani Electrical Vs Union of India set aside an appellate order that rejected an appeal on ‘functus officio’ grounds. The court held that since the original dismissal was only for failure to make a mandatory pre-deposit, not on merits, the authority wasn’t functus officio after the deposit was subsequently made.
The Calcutta High Court refused to intervene in a GST demand order under Section 73, rejecting a writ petition filed eight months late. The Court held that statutory appellate remedies cannot be bypassed when the case does not involve jurisdictional issues or violation of natural justice.
The Allahabad High Court ruled that appellate authorities cannot remand cases back to lower officers in GST registration cancellation appeals, as it is barred by Section 107 of the GST Act.
The Karnataka High Court quashed a GST demand on the trading margin from voucher sales, clarifying that this activity is not a supply of goods or services.
Azam Laminators Private Limited Vs Additional Director (Madras High Court) 5% GST on Nizam Pakku – Issuance of SCN and disputing position settled by SC and Binding AAAR Ruling tantamount to clear abuse of Law: Madras High Court The Madras High Court has struck down a Show Cause Notice (SCN) issued to M/s Azam Laminators […]
The Madras High Court ruled that tax payments made to the e-cash ledger are valid even if GSTR-3B returns aren’t filed during liquidation, quashing a GST demand.
The Jharkhand High Court upheld a GST penalty for Pratik Enterprises, citing a discrepancy between the loading point in the E-Way bill and the actual location, supported by GPS data.
