This practical note explains how taxpayers and professionals can rely on the Bagga Vet Pharma ruling to challenge non-speaking GST orders. It highlights the importance of natural justice, reasoned adjudication, and proper consideration of taxpayer replies.
This article explains how cross-empowerment under Section 6 of the GST law is meant to facilitate coordinated enforcement without allowing duplicate proceedings. It highlights the need for a formal mechanism to allocate jurisdiction and prevent harassment through parallel actions.
This article examines whether Enforcement Officers can legally issue DRC-01 under Section 67 of the GST law. It explains why tax demands must be initiated only under Sections 73 or 74 through a valid Show Cause Notice.
This article explains how Section 6(2)(b) of the CGST Act restricts dual GST proceedings on the same subject matter and tax period. It discusses jurisdictional conflicts between State and Central officers and the remedies available to taxpayers.
The article examines alleged GST enforcement practices in Karnataka where ITC is denied based on NGTP reports and retrospective supplier cancellations. It argues that bona fide buyers with supporting documents should not face demands without independent verification and proper hearing.
The article explains that audits and investigations serve distinct legal purposes under GST and require different taxpayer responses. Understanding this distinction is crucial to safeguarding procedural rights.
This article explains the extent of the burden of proof under Section 155 of the CGST Act. The key takeaway is that recipients must establish genuine transactions but are not required to guarantee supplier conduct beyond their control.
Dual Control Without Coordination: How CGST–SGST Jurisdiction Gaps Are Trapping Taxpayers in Parallel Proceedings Overview One of the most troubling administrative failures in the GST regime is not found in the charging provision, the rate notifications, or even in the return architecture. It is found in the everyday working of jurisdiction. On paper, GST is […]
The Court held that absence of lorry receipts or weighment slips, by itself, cannot justify denial of Input Tax Credit when invoices, supplier returns, and tax payments establish the genuineness of supplies.
The representation seeks safeguards against automatic ITC reversals arising from supplier defaults and retrospective cancellations. It emphasizes that bona fide buyers deserve fair treatment and a meaningful opportunity to prove genuine transactions.
