Goods and Services Tax : The Gujarat High Court examined whether a taxpayer’s selection of “No” for personal hearing could override the statutory req...
Goods and Services Tax : The Orissa High Court examined whether tax could be demanded after reversal of the disputed ITC. It held that raising a fresh dema...
Goods and Services Tax : The Rajasthan High Court examined whether GST registration could be refused due to non-filing of returns in another State. It held...
Goods and Services Tax : The Supreme Court stayed a judgment that held mere uploading of notices and orders on the GST portal does not amount to valid comm...
Goods and Services Tax : The Supreme Court refused to bypass the statutory GST appeal mechanism and directed the taxpayer to pursue appellate remedies. How...
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 Gujarat High Court ruled that the Supreme Court’s COVID-19 limitation exclusion must be considered while computing timelines...
Goods and Services Tax : The Delhi High Court held that exoneration under Section 73 does not automatically bar proceedings under Section 74 because both p...
Goods and Services Tax : The Supreme Court has agreed to consider whether a single GST show cause notice can cover multiple financial years under Section 7...
Goods and Services Tax : The Supreme Court took up a challenge to Section 16(2)(c) of the CGST Act where ITC was denied despite tax having been paid by the...
Goods and Services Tax : The Supreme Court prima facie observed that Section 67(4) permits sealing of premises only when access is denied. It issued notice...
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 ...
The Court ruled that large gaps between GST returns and ITR figures cannot justify Section 74 demands without forensic verification. Actual supplies must be established through audit.
The Court struck down key tribunal reform provisions, holding that reintroducing invalidated clauses is unconstitutional, directly impacting the design and functioning of GSTAT.
The Supreme Court stayed GST proceedings after finding the show cause notice under Section 74 contained only figures without explaining fraud or suppression. The ruling stresses that detailed allegations are mandatory to invoke extended limitation.
The court ruled that Section 74 proceedings cannot be invoked in the absence of fraud or wilful suppression, especially where tax and interest were voluntarily paid before investigation.
The Court upheld the Tribunal’s view that interest cannot be levied when duty paid is fully creditable to downstream units. It confirms that compensatory interest requires actual revenue loss.
The court ruled that a CBIC circular on deemed exports cannot block ITC refunds for actual exporters. Refunds under Section 54(3) must follow the statute when no deemed export benefits are claimed.
The High Court held that mandating monthly ISD credit distribution through rules exceeded the powers granted under the CGST Act. Procedural rules cannot impose time limits absent legislative authorization.
The Court admitted the Revenue’s appeal against a tribunal ruling that set aside excise demands as revenue neutral. The key takeaway is that the legal question on valuation under Rules 8 and 9 remains open for final determination.
The High Court held that a review cannot be entertained without a clear error or new evidence. Re-arguing the case on merits was found impermissible.
The Court ruled that “sufficient cause” must explain the entire limitation period, not just post-expiry delay. Negligence or inaction, including by government bodies, cannot justify condonation.
