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...
The Tribunal held that mismatch alone does not prove fraud under Section 74. The key takeaway is that penal provisions cannot be invoked without evidence of intent to evade tax.
The Tribunal held that no profiteering occurred as the ITC-to-purchase value ratio declined after GST implementation. It ruled that no additional benefit arose, eliminating the obligation to pass on ITC benefits to buyers.
GSTAT serves as the second appellate authority with defined procedures and timelines. Compliance with filing and pre-deposit rules is essential.
The issue concerns procedural requirements for filing GST appeals. The instructions mandate document submission and pre-deposit, ensuring proper compliance and avoiding defects.
The case examined whether GST rate cuts were passed on to consumers. The authority held that increasing base prices instead of reducing ticket prices violated Section 171, resulting in confirmed profiteering and refund directions.
The case involved non-passing of ITC benefits after GST implementation. The Tribunal held that full ITC gains must be passed on and ordered refund with interest.
The issue included verification of ITC benefit among buyers. The Tribunal relied on DGAP findings and the builder’s acceptance to confirm liability. The ruling underscores the evidentiary role of buyer confirmations.
The issue involved lack of operational GST Tribunal despite its formal constitution. The Court noted that this forces taxpayers to approach the High Court unnecessarily. The key takeaway is that authorities must ensure timely functionality of statutory tribunals.
The government has appointed 22 Judicial Members as Vice Presidents of GSTAT benches. The move aims to improve efficiency and strengthen GST dispute resolution.
The Tribunal held that even a marginal increase in ITC must be passed on to buyers. Failure resulted in refund liability with interest under Section 171. The ruling confirms that interest is payable from the date of excess collection. Arguments to defer interest to project completion were rejected.
