The Court held that misclassification of ITC between CGST/SGST and IGST does not result in excess claim if the credit is otherwise admissible. Once the error is rectified through annual returns, no demand can survive.
Explains how the Court ruled that IGST on ocean freight under RCM was illegally collected and must be refunded with interest. Key takeaway: the government cannot retain money collected without authority.
Supreme Court upheld Delhi HC ruling that email sent to registered GST address is valid service; consolidated ITC notice for multiple years permissible.
The Delhi High Court upheld an anti-profiteering order, ruling that merely increasing product quantity or volume after a GST rate reduction does not fulfill the requirement of passing the tax benefit to consumers. The anti-profiteering mechanism safeguards consumer interest, demanding lower prices, not unsolicited product changes, when GST rates drop.
The Andhra Pradesh High Court ruled that the two-year limitation period under Section 54 of the CGST Act does not apply to refund applications for tax paid without the authority of law. The court directed the GST department to process a company’s refund claim for tax erroneously paid on exempted hostel accommodation services, overruling the department’s rejection based on time limits.
Bombay HC held that clubbing several financial years in a single show cause notice is not permissible under CGST Act, 2017. Each tax period must be assessed separately, making consolidated notices without jurisdiction.
Karnataka HC rules 10 crore collected during a GST search was non-voluntary and illegal. HC ordered department to refund amount with 6% annual interest to taxpayer.
Despite GST’s modernization, GSTR-9 and GSTR-9C annual returns face technical flaws, ambiguity in ITC/RCM reporting, and portal limitations, complicating taxpayer compliance.
A new facility in Invoice Management System (IMS) has been introduced on GST portal wherein taxpayers are allowed to keep credit notes as Pending for one tax period.
Madras High Court rules GST appeal begins upon communication of order, not mere uploading to the portal, distinguishing served from communicated.
