Goods and Services Tax : Andhra Pradesh High Court held that GST officers of a transit State cannot invoke Sections 129 or 130 against goods merely passing...
Goods and Services Tax : Gujarat High Court held that GST paid on cotton seed oil cake must be refunded since the product is exempt as cattle feed under No...
Goods and Services Tax : GSTAT directed service through registered post/speed post after notices sent via portal and email failed to receive any effective ...
Goods and Services Tax : The Karnataka High Court held that adjudication by the same officer who conducted the GST audit raises serious concerns of bias an...
Goods and Services Tax : The Madras High Court held that common packaging elements, graphics, and colour schemes do not automatically create a “brand nam...
Goods and Services Tax : Explore Supreme Court's scrutiny of whether supplying cranes for services like loading, unloading, lifting, and shifting qualifies...
Goods and Services Tax : Explore the case of Pradeep Kanthed v. Union of India where the Supreme Court issues notice to the Finance Ministry regarding the ...
Goods and Services Tax : Commissioner of Central Goods And Service Tax & Ors Vs Safari Retreats Private Limited & Ors (Supreme Court of India) The ...
Goods and Services Tax : The 45th meeting of Goods and Services Tax Council (“GST Council”) is scheduled to be held on September 17, 2021. The Ministry...
Custom Duty, Income Tax : The Karnataka High Court in M/s Pellagic Food Ingredients Private Ltd. v. Union of India [Writ Petition No. 14737/2021[T-CUS] issu...
Goods and Services Tax : The Delhi High Court held that an adjudication order passed by an officer who never personally heard the assessee violates princip...
Goods and Services Tax : The Gujarat High Court held that authorities cannot pass adverse GST orders without complying with the mandatory hearing requireme...
Goods and Services Tax : The Bombay High Court held that importers under CIF contracts cannot be taxed under reverse charge for ocean freight since they ar...
Goods and Services Tax : The Punjab and Haryana High Court held that a Section 73 GST notice lacking specific details, computations, and supporting materia...
Goods and Services Tax : The Madras High Court held that penalties under Section 122 of the CGST Act must equal the ineligible ITC availed or passed on in ...
Excise Duty : Notification No. 32/2015-Central Excise Dated- 4th June, 2015 Ethanol produced from molasses generated from cane crushed in the ...
Service Tax : Circular No. 184/3/2015-ST Dated the 3rd June, 2015 It is further clarified that exemption from service tax still continues to ser...
Custom Duty : the floods in the State of Jammu and Kashmir (the State) from whole of the duty as specified under the First Schedule and whole of...
Excise Duty : Grants exemption from Basic Excise Duty to goods donated or purchased out of cash donations for the relief and rehabilitation of p...
Custom Duty : New posts have been created in the rank of Commissioners of Customs in DRI and DGCEI for adjudication of cases as investigated by ...
Andhra Pradesh High Court held that GST officers of a transit State cannot invoke Sections 129 or 130 against goods merely passing through the State. The ruling clarifies that IGST transactions unrelated to the State do not confer detention or confiscation powers.
Gujarat High Court held that GST paid on cotton seed oil cake must be refunded since the product is exempt as cattle feed under Notification No. 02/2017-CT (Rate). The ruling clarifies that exemption depends on end use as cattle feed, not the supply route or purchaser category.
The Delhi High Court held that an adjudication order passed by an officer who never personally heard the assessee violates principles of natural justice. The Court ruled that “one who hears must decide” and remanded the matter for fresh adjudication.
GSTAT directed service through registered post/speed post after notices sent via portal and email failed to receive any effective response from the Department. The Tribunal held that Section 169 of the CGST Act permits cumulative modes of service to ensure proper adjudication and natural justice.
The Gujarat High Court held that authorities cannot pass adverse GST orders without complying with the mandatory hearing requirement under Section 75(4). The Court ruled that even if the assessee opts against personal hearing, principles of natural justice must still be followed.
The Karnataka High Court held that adjudication by the same officer who conducted the GST audit raises serious concerns of bias and violation of natural justice. The matter was remanded after directing that jurisdictional objections be decided before proceeding on merits.
The Madras High Court held that common packaging elements, graphics, and colour schemes do not automatically create a “brand name” under GST law. The ruling clarifies that exemption cannot be denied merely due to visual similarity where enforceable brand rights are relinquished.
The Bombay High Court held that importers under CIF contracts cannot be taxed under reverse charge for ocean freight since they are not recipients of the transportation service. The Court quashed the show cause notice and ruled the levy beyond statutory charging provisions.
The Punjab and Haryana High Court held that a Section 73 GST notice lacking specific details, computations, and supporting material is legally unsustainable. The ruling emphasizes that vague allegations violate principles of natural justice and deprive taxpayers of an effective opportunity to respond.
The Bombay High Court held that assignment of leasehold rights in immovable property is a transfer of benefits arising from immovable property and not a supply of services under GST. The ruling clarifies that such transactions fall outside Section 7 read with Schedule II of the GST Act.
