Sponsored
    Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : Hatsoff Helicopter Training P Limited Vs State Of Karnataka (Karnataka High Court)
Appeal Number : Writ Petition No. 24699 of 2023
Date of Judgement/Order : 27/11/2023
Related Assessment Year :
Become a Premium member to Download. If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
Sponsored

Hatsoff Helicopter Training P Limited Vs State Of Karnataka (Karnataka High Court)

Introduction: The Karnataka High Court recently delivered a significant judgment in the case of Hatsoff Helicopter Training P Limited vs. State of Karnataka. The petitioner challenged the orders dated 30.01.2023 and 30.09.2023, seeking the quashing of a recovery notice and a refund of Rs. 1,52,03,733/-. The dispute revolved around tax liability concerning “Bulk Simulator Training Services” provided to defense establishments. The crux of the matter was the denial of tax exemption due to non-furnishing of GSTIN.

Detailed Analysis: The petitioner, offering training services to defense entities, contended that services provided to the Central/State Government were exempted as per Notification No.12/2017. However, the authorities initiated proceedings, alleging incorrect tax payment under IGST instead of SGST and CGST. The petitioner argued that the absence of GSTIN did not affect eligibility for exemption.

The High Court examined the impugned orders and observed that the denial of exemption solely based on the non-disclosure of GSTIN needed further scrutiny. It highlighted the petitioner’s assertion of bona fide invoicing, emphasizing that services were sponsored by the government. The court questioned the authorities’ failure to consider the actual place of supply and the exemption’s significance.

The judgment addressed the inadequacy of the authorities’ conclusions, emphasizing that a mere absence of GSTIN should not warrant exemption denial. It underscored the need for a comprehensive examination of the petitioner’s claims, especially considering the sponsored nature of services. The court directed the reconsideration of the case by the third respondent, emphasizing a thorough evaluation of the petitioner’s response.

Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.

Sponsored

Join Taxguru’s Network for Latest updates on Income Tax, GST, Company Law, Corporate Laws and other related subjects.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Sponsored
Sponsored
Search Post by Date
July 2024
M T W T F S S
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
293031