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 held that presumptions under Sections 132(4A) and 292C of the Income Tax Act apply only to income-tax proceedings. GST authorities must independently assess evidence without borrowing statutory presumptions from another law.
The issue was whether ITC could be recovered from a bona fide recipient without first proceeding against the supplier. The key takeaway is that statutory procedure under Section 42 must be followed before reversing ITC.
The court held that ITC disclosed in the annual return cannot be rejected solely because it was missed in monthly returns. Appellate authorities must give clear reasons before denying such claims.
The court ruled that exporters making zero-rated supplies can claim refund of unutilized ITC even if suppliers ignored deemed export procedures. Refund cannot be denied when deemed export benefits were never availed.
The Court held that duty-paid items supplied directly to site are not includible when the final plant is immovable. The key takeaway is that excisability, not contract value, governs valuation.
The Court rejected a plea for GST cancellation after finding suppression of facts and false claims about business operations. The key takeaway is that writ relief is unavailable where conduct is deceptive.
The court held that GST liability rests with firms and responsible persons, not their auditor, reaffirming that professionals cannot be arrested mechanically without direct culpability.
The High Court held that complex issues on overlapping State and Central proceedings should be examined by the Appellate Authority. The Supreme Court has stayed the order after notice on the argument that duplicate proceedings are barred by statute.
The Court upheld cancellation after officials found forged rental agreements and no business activity at the declared premises. The ruling confirms that GST registration obtained through fraudulent documents cannot be sustained.
The Court ruled that an unreasoned appellate order violates Section 107(12). It held that authorities must provide clear findings and reasoning when deciding GST appeals.
