Understand the Goods and Services Tax (GST) and its impact on businesses. Learn about GST rates, compliance requirements, and its role in simplifying taxation. Stay updated with the latest GST news and updates.
CA, CS, CMA : The update discusses GST rulings on ITC and refunds, income tax relief interpretations, and insolvency reforms. It also covers dis...
Goods and Services Tax : The court held that recovery cannot proceed against a legal heir without determining liability under Section 93, reinforcing due p...
Goods and Services Tax : The comparison shows how large-scale frauds go undetected for years while professionals face immediate coercive action. Courts hav...
Goods and Services Tax : The law prohibits all real-money online games regardless of skill, marking a major shift from earlier legal precedents and reshapi...
Goods and Services Tax : The issue was classification of bundled hotel services under GST. It is clarified that naturally bundled services are taxed as com...
Goods and Services Tax : The representation highlights ambiguity in whether the ₹2.5 crore ITC threshold should be annual or cumulative. It emphasizes th...
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 : The case highlights that summons lacking details of the underlying inquiry violate procedural fairness. It underscores the need fo...
Goods and Services Tax : CBI arrested GST officials for demanding a bribe to facilitate registration approval. The case highlights strict enforcement again...
Goods and Services Tax : The court held that an adjudication order passed without considering the taxpayer’s reply is unsustainable. It remitted the matt...
Goods and Services Tax : The Court held that a single show cause notice covering multiple assessment years is not legally sustainable. Authorities were per...
Goods and Services Tax : The ruling highlights that ignoring a taxpayer’s additional reply and request for hearing renders the order unsustainable. The c...
Goods and Services Tax : The court held that the revised 18% GST rate is applicable, but deferred recovery of the 6% differential tax as reimbursement from...
Goods and Services Tax : The Court removed the requirement to verify “authorized operations” for earlier transactions, holding that the condition was i...
Goods and Services Tax : The GST portal launches an Excel-based IMS Offline Tool to help taxpayers efficiently manage and process invoices. It enables bulk...
Goods and Services Tax : CBIC extends due date for filing March 2026 GSTR-3B to April 21, 2026, for registered persons under Section 39 of the CGST Act....
Goods and Services Tax : GSTN clarified that system-calculated interest for February 2026 was incorrectly reflected in March returns due to a technical iss...
Goods and Services Tax : GSTN has enabled editing of the pre-deposit percentage in APL-01 filings. The change allows taxpayers flexibility, while verificat...
Goods and Services Tax : Taxpayers faced issues filing appeals where adjudication orders showed zero demand. GSTN clarified that such system limitations re...
Madras High Court held that order of assessment based on issuance of general notices calling for particulars is liable to be set aside.
Madras High Court held that exemption from payment of tax leviable under the Tamil Nadu Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, 1974 is allowable on cars purchased by visually handicapped persons.
Examine the Calcutta High Courts ruling in Usha Martin Limited Vs Deputy Commissioner of State Tax, highlighting how the court adjudicated on matters related to delayed appeals, e-Way Bill expiration, and tax levies.
Unlock the complexities of ISD vs Cross Charge for distributing input tax credit (ITC) after the 50th GST Council Meeting. Understand the implications, taxability of supplies between distinct persons, and the recommended clarifications. Stay informed for compliance in the evolving GST landscape.
Get insights from the Sunlight Cable Industries case as the Bombay High Court quashes Revenue’s order on withholding IGST refund. Explore the assessment of double benefit claims.
Read the full text of the judgment/order of the Karnataka High Court in the case of Singhi Buildtech Pvt. Ltd. Vs Additional Commissioner Of Commercial Taxes Enforcement. The court clarifies the power of officers under Section 67(4) of the Goods and Services Tax (GST) Act regarding sealing or breaking premises. Get detailed analysis and conclusion.This article provides an overview of the judgment/order issued by the Karnataka High Court in the case of Singhi Buildtech Pvt. Ltd. versus Additional Commissioner Of Commercial Taxes Enforcement. The court clarifies the power of officers under Section 67(4) of the Goods and Services Tax (GST) Act regarding the sealing or breaking of premises. The analysis delves into the arguments presented by the petitioner and the response from the learned counsel for the Revenue. Finally, the conclusion highlights the court’s decision and subsequent actions. Analysis: The petitioner, Singhi Buildtech Pvt. Ltd., challenges the order issued by the respondent No.3 under Section 67(4) of the Karnataka Goods and Services Tax Act. The petitioner, a private limited company, claims to be a registered dealer under the provisions of the Act. The case revolves around the sealing of the petitioner’s premises by the respondent officers during a search operation. The petitioner argues that the sealing was done without legal authority. The petitioner’s counsel contends that the authorization order for the search was issued solely based on suspicion and does not grant the authority to seal the premises. Additionally, it is argued that Section 67(4) of the Act does not empower the respondent No.3 to seal the business premises since access was not denied by the petitioner. On the other hand, the Revenue’s counsel presents the original file, which contains an authorization issued by the Additional Commissioner of Commercial Taxes [Enforcement], South Zone, Bangalore. The authorization grants the officer, Sri J.J. Prakash, Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, the power to conduct inspection, search, and seizure of the premises in question. The court acknowledges the validity of this authorization, thus refuting the petitioner’s argument. The court refers to Section 67(4) of the Act, which empowers the authorized officer to seal or break open premises and receptacles suspected of containing goods, accounts, registers, or documents. The Revenue asserts that denial of access to the computer system and the disruption of the tally software and internet connection led to the invocation of Section 67(4) and subsequent sealing of the premises. However, the learned Additional Government Advocate, representing the respondent No.3, assures the court that the petitioner’s premises will be unsealed in the petitioner’s presence on a mutually convenient date, provided the petitioner cooperates with the inspection and search of the computer system and other records. Conclusion: After considering the arguments presented by both parties, the court orders the Revenue to unseal the premises in question on a revised date of 08.02.2019, at 11:00 a.m. The petitioner is expected to cooperate with the inspection and search of the premises, including the computer system. This judgment clarifies the power of officers under Section 67(4) of the GST Act and emphasizes the importance of lawful procedures in conducting searches and sealing premises.
On the basis of GST returns filed by the taxpayers, nowadays the department is sending notices for the verification of Merchant export transactions. Some time manufacturers may have failed to meet any of the stipulated conditions and therefore face the demand for differential tax (Tax leviable on the sale of goods as per standard rate-actual tax levied […]
Calcutta High Court allows writ petition in the case of L.G. Balakrishnan & Bros Limited Vs ACIT, setting aside an earlier rejection of appeal due to a delay of 148 days. The court sets a cost of Rs. 40,000/- to be paid to WBGST Authority.
Delve into the case of Santi Kumar Oswal Vs ACIT where ITAT Kolkata ruled that no disallowance can be made for GST paid before the due date of filing ROI, emphasizing fair application of the Income Tax Act.
Explore the recent Telangana High Court decision in the case of Nektar Therapeutics India Pvt Ltd vs Union of India, where the court quashed a show cause notice due to its issuance by an improper officer.
