Goods and Services Tax : The article discusses how GST authorities are increasingly reversing ITC based on upstream NGTP allegations without proving fraud ...
Goods and Services Tax : The Gujarat High Court held that supplier tax payment remains mandatory for ITC claims under Section 16(2)(c). However, ITC cann...
Goods and Services Tax : Explains how Section 16(2)(c) links ITC eligibility to supplier tax payment, causing hardship for bona fide taxpayers even when in...
Goods and Services Tax : This article explains how manipulating input tax credit in GSTR-3B without GSTR-2B support is treated as fraud under GST law. It h...
Goods and Services Tax : The article highlights how aggressive GST actions impact genuine businesses. The key takeaway is the need for balanced enforcement...
Goods and Services Tax : Authorities uncovered fraudulent ITC claims based on fake invoices without actual supply of goods or services. The accused was arr...
Goods and Services Tax : Authorities arrested the key accused for orchestrating fake ITC claims and fictitious export transactions. The case highlights str...
Goods and Services Tax : Authorities uncovered fraudulent ITC claims exceeding ₹8 crore without actual supply of goods. The ruling highlights that ITC is...
Goods and Services Tax : CGST Delhi South arrested a director for allegedly availing ₹6.53 crore in fraudulent ITC based on bogus invoices worth ₹36.28...
Goods and Services Tax : Authorities uncovered a web of non-existent entities issuing invoices without supply, causing huge GST revenue loss. The mastermin...
Goods and Services Tax : Punjab and Haryana High Court granted regular bail to an accused linked to alleged fake GST billing and forged documents. The Cour...
Goods and Services Tax : The High Court held that summons issued under Section 70 of the GST Act were valid and interference at the investigation stage wou...
Goods and Services Tax : The issue involved alleged cyber fraud where funds were credited to the petitioner’s account. The Court granted relief consideri...
Goods and Services Tax : The SC held that imposing an additional bank guarantee was excessive when a ₹1 crore bond with sureties was already furnished. I...
Goods and Services Tax : Considering the duration of custody and the likely delay in trial, the Court found continued detention unnecessary. It granted bai...
Goods and Services Tax : A Delhi GST alert circular reveals a Rs.6 crore Input Tax Credit fraud by a non-existent entity, detailing the scheme and mandated...
CA, CS, CMA : Delhi GST Dept exposes ₹30 Cr fake ITC via non-existent firms. Circular mandates recovery, ITC reversal & cross-jurisdiction enf...
Goods and Services Tax : CBIC issues guidelines for a second All-India drive to detect and eliminate fake GST registrations, safeguarding government revenu...
Goods and Services Tax : The Ministry of Finance, Government of India, recently released Instruction No. 03/2023-GST, dated 14th June, 2023, outlining stri...
Goods and Services Tax : Government of India has noticed instances of fake GST registrations and issuance of bogus invoices leading to revenue loss. A meet...
The Madras High Court upheld the blocking of Input Tax Credit under Rule 86A after the Managing Director admitted availing ITC on blocked invoices during inspection. The Court ruled that such admission weakened the taxpayer’s challenge to the department’s action.
Courts have increasingly held that Input Tax Credit cannot be denied to bona fide taxpayers merely because suppliers failed to pay GST. Authorities must prove fraud or collusion before disallowing ITC.
Courts clarify that input tax credit cannot be denied merely because a supplier’s GST registration was cancelled retrospectively. Authorities must examine the genuineness of the buyer’s transactions and supporting documents.
Section 64 of the CGST Act empowers the proper officer to undertake summary assessment in special cases where any delay is likely to adversely affect revenue. This provision is intended only for urgent situations — for example, unaccounted goods in transit, perishable goods, or fly‑by‑night dealers where immediate crystallisation of liability is essential. It is an exception […]
The Allahabad High Court rejected bail in a large GST fraud involving fake invoices and dummy firms used to generate fraudulent input tax credit. The Court held that economic offences causing huge loss to public funds require a stricter approach to bail.
High Courts have emphasized that ITC cannot be denied solely on the basis of a supplier being declared non-existent. Authorities must provide evidence of the buyer’s involvement and follow principles of natural justice.
The High Court refused regular bail citing serious allegations of breach of trust and forgery involving substantial GST refund transactions. The petitioner’s prior absconding and risk of re-absconding were key reasons for denial.
ITC reversal is valid only when common credit is used for both taxable and exempt supplies and Rule 42 is strictly applied. Courts have ruled that arbitrary or lump-sum reversals without statutory computation are illegal.
Courts have questioned the practice of denying ITC by calling suppliers “non-existent” while simultaneously taxing outward supplies. The emerging judicial view protects bona fide buyers and rejects inconsistent fact-finding that causes cascading taxation.
SC directed completion of investigation within three months, ordering bail if probe is not concluded. The ruling balances prolonged custody against seriousness of allegations.
