Goods and Services Tax : Ambiguity under Section 112(8)(b) of the CGST Act has created confusion over GSTAT pre-deposit calculations after reduction of tax...
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 : Taxpayers and professionals are facing multiple procedural doubts regarding GSTAT appeal filing requirements, including affidavits...
Goods and Services Tax : GSTAT के नए आदेश के अनुसार सभी लंबित और नई अपीलें पहले...
Goods and Services Tax : The Andhra Pradesh High Court held that Customs authorities are responsible for levy and assessment of IGST on imported goods. The...
CA, CS, CMA : ICAI has recommended mandatory verification of the Certificate of Practice for Chartered Accountants appearing before GSTAT to ens...
Goods and Services Tax : A representation has urged reconsideration of GSTAT Procedure Rules requiring all relied-upon documents to be filed with the appea...
Goods and Services Tax : A tax bar body has sought reduction of GSTAT appeal and application fees, citing affordability concerns. The key takeaway is that ...
Goods and Services Tax : यह कि जीएसटी के अंतर्गत अपीलीय ट्रिब्यूनल ट्रिब...
Goods and Services Tax : Issues ranging from mandatory declarations to certification and translation requirements have been flagged. The core message is th...
Goods and Services Tax : GSTAT held that failure to pass on additional Input Tax Credit benefits to eligible homebuyers violated Section 171 of the CGST Ac...
Goods and Services Tax : The Court held that once the GST Appellate Tribunal became operational and timelines were extended, disputes should be pursued thr...
Goods and Services Tax : The Madhya Pradesh High Court dismissed a writ petition challenging GST registration cancellation after noting the availability of...
Goods and Services Tax : The Tribunal allowed service of notice through registered post and speed post after no response was received regarding verificatio...
Goods and Services Tax : GSTAT upheld anti-profiteering findings after the developer accepted the DGAP report concerning ITC benefits in a housing project....
Goods and Services Tax : The GST Appellate Tribunal issued a detailed order constituting benches across India and classifying GST disputes into three categ...
Goods and Services Tax : The Principal Bench of GSTAT instructed scrutiny officers not to raise defects where appellants upload required soft copy document...
Goods and Services Tax : The Central Government has authorized the GSTAT Principal Bench, New Delhi, to hear appeals under Section 101B of the CGST Act. Th...
Goods and Services Tax : The government has appointed 22 Judicial Members as Vice Presidents of GSTAT benches. The move aims to improve efficiency and stre...
Goods and Services Tax : Goa notifies 30 June 2026 as deadline to file GST Appellate Tribunal appeals for orders communicated before 1 April 2026 under Sec...
GSTAT upheld anti-profiteering findings after the developer accepted the DGAP report concerning ITC benefits in a housing project. The Tribunal ruled that excess benefit given to some buyers cannot offset shortfall payable to others.
The Andhra Pradesh High Court held that Customs authorities are responsible for levy and assessment of IGST on imported goods. The ruling has renewed debate over whether appeals should lie before GSTAT or CESTAT.
The GSTAT held that customer emails denying receipt of ITC benefit could not outweigh books of accounts, ledgers, and credit notes showing price adjustments. The Tribunal recognised adjustment of dues as a valid mode of passing GST benefits.
The GSTAT directed the DGAP to re-examine profiteering calculations after observing a possible miscalculation in the Input Tax Credit figures. The Tribunal sought additional documents and ordered submission of a supplementary report.
The GSTAT set aside the DGAP’s profiteering report after questioning the methodology used to calculate Input Tax Credit benefits in a real estate project. The Tribunal directed a fresh investigation and recalculation of alleged profiteering.
The Calcutta High Court refused to entertain the writ petition after noting that the GST Appellate Tribunal under Section 112 had been constituted. The petitioner was granted liberty to file an appeal before the Tribunal.
Telangana High Court directed that no coercive GST recovery action should be taken if the taxpayer deposits 10% of the assessed tax liability within four weeks. The taxpayer was permitted to pursue second appeal before the GST Appellate Tribunal.
Telangana High Court directed that no coercive recovery action should be taken against the taxpayer if 10% of the assessed GST liability is deposited within the prescribed period.
Telangana High Court declined to examine the merits of the GST demand and appellate order because an alternative statutory remedy before GSTAT was available. The taxpayer was granted liberty to file an appeal before the GST Appellate Tribunal with statutory pre-deposit.
GSTAT noted inconsistencies in the DGAP’s findings regarding whether the Respondent had actually increased base prices after GST rate reduction. The Tribunal held that such contradictions required comprehensive reinvestigation.
