Goods and Services Tax : A supplier cannot issue a GST credit note merely because the buyer has not paid the invoice. The proper remedy is to document the ...
Goods and Services Tax : The article explains how mandatory IMS and the Zero-Mismatch Policy require taxpayers to verify invoices before claiming ITC, maki...
Goods and Services Tax : The article explains how IMS makes accepted invoice records the basis for ITC eligibility, strengthening compliance, fraud detecti...
Goods and Services Tax : The Madras High Court held that retrospective cancellation of a supplier's GST registration alone is insufficient to deny ITC. Aut...
Goods and Services Tax : The article explains why retrospective GST cancellation alone should not result in ITC denial where buyers have complied with Sect...
Goods and Services Tax : Representation addressed to Union Finance Minister, GST Council and CBIC seeks legislative and administrative relief for bona fide...
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 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 : Government advisories revised the IMS process to stop unfair tax escalation on credit note rejection. The key takeaway is balanced...
Income Tax : Where unaccounted sales were established through seized material, only the net profit embedded therein was liable to tax, and not ...
Goods and Services Tax : Madras High Court set aside certain GST orders after holding that DRC-01 notice should have preceded adjudication following the ea...
Goods and Services Tax : Odisha AAR held that questions relating to refund of accumulated ITC under Section 54(3) are not maintainable under the advance ru...
Goods and Services Tax : The High Court granted regular bail in a GST fraud prosecution after noting that the investigation had been completed, the complai...
Goods and Services Tax : The SC declined to interfere with the High Court ruling that Rule 86A cannot be used to create a negative Electronic Credit Ledger...
Goods and Services Tax : GSTN has launched a standardized Annexure-B Offline Utility for refund applications involving accumulated ITC to enable automated ...
Goods and Services Tax : The portal will restrict GSTR-3B filing if ITC reclaims exceed ledger balances. The key takeaway is mandatory correction of excess...
Goods and Services Tax : The Delhi government allows registered taxpayers to rectify GST orders where previously denied ITC is now eligible under section 1...
Goods and Services Tax : Rajasthan GST circular directs officers to reject Input Tax Credit claims for taxpayers who register after 30 days from becoming l...
Goods and Services Tax : Learn about the Rajasthan Commercial Taxes Department's new directive on verifying and rejecting Input Tax Credit claims for busin...
The court set aside denial of ITC refund based on intermediary classification without proper examination. It remanded the matter for fresh adjudication considering agreements and legal precedents.
The Court held that payments made during inspections may indicate coercion. Voluntariness requires free consent and proper opportunity, not pressure.
The court set aside GST orders after finding both original and appellate proceedings were effectively ex-parte. It held that the taxpayer must be given an opportunity to reply to the show cause notice before adjudication.
The issue was place of supply for intermediary services under GST. The amendment shifts it to the recipient’s location, enabling export benefits and altering tax liability.
The High Court examined a tax demand arising from ITC mismatches between GSTR-3B and GSTR-2A. It held that authorities must follow the reconciliation procedure prescribed under CBIC Circular before adjudication. The case was remanded for fresh consideration.
The Court ruled that authorities cannot deny ITC by disregarding binding CBIC circulars. It held that cross-charging of ITC is legally permissible alongside ISD.
The authority analysed whether an industrial plant is movable or immovable. It held that the plant, installed for long-term use and not marketable as a whole, is immovable property. Consequently, ITC on related inputs was denied.
The applicant sought clarity on refund eligibility after filing NIL claims but later withdrew the application citing procedural confusion. The authority disposed of the matter without ruling on merits.
The ruling examines whether construction services for machinery foundations qualify for ITC. It holds that such foundations are integral to plant and machinery and not barred under Section 17(5). The decision clarifies eligibility where structures directly support manufacturing equipment.
The issue was whether ITC on construction services for machinery support is restricted. The ruling held that such foundation forms part of plant and machinery, making ITC admissible.
