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 the contractor failed to fully pass on GST input tax credit benefits under Section 171. It directed refund of ₹9.36 lakh proportionate amount with interest for completed work.
Pursuant to High Court observations and fresh investigation, GSTAT held that the developer did not gain additional ITC benefit warranting price reduction.
GSTAT held that proceedings under Section 74 could not be sustained in absence of fraud or suppression and remanded the matter for fresh determination under Section 73 by the Proper Officer.
DG Anti Profiteering Vs Mantri Castles Private Limited (GSTAT) The proceedings arose from a reference received from the Standing Committee on 30.05.2022 to investigate an application alleging profiteering in respect of construction services supplied for the project “Mantri Serenity” at Bangalore. The allegation concerned non-passing of benefit under Section 171 of the CGST Act. The […]
The appellate authority sent the matter back for re-investigation after the developer claimed that a higher benefit than alleged profiteering was already passed to buyers. The key takeaway is that factual verification of claimed price reductions is essential before confirming profiteering.
The compendium explains the legal structure, jurisdiction, and appeal process of GSTAT as it becomes operational from 2026. It also highlights procedural burdens that may affect effective access to justice.
The court declined to keep the writ pending once the appellate forum became functional, directing the taxpayer to pursue the statutory appeal. It reaffirmed that disputes must move to GSTAT when an effective remedy is available.
A tax bar body has sought reduction of GSTAT appeal and application fees, citing affordability concerns. The key takeaway is that high costs may defeat the purpose of a statutory appellate forum.
The Tribunal held that where the input tax credit ratio reduced in the post-GST period, no additional benefit accrued to the developer. Consequently, no profiteering under Section 171 was established.
The Tribunal held that increasing base prices after a GST rate reduction defeated the statutory mandate of Section 171. Profiteering was confirmed as the benefit of tax reduction was not passed on to consumers.
