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 Supreme Court restored bail to one accused after noting prior custodial interrogation, while permitting limited custody of the other. The ruling balances procedural compliance with individual circumstances in GST-related offences.
The High Court suspended the blockage of ITC after noting that adverse third-party material was not supplied before passing the order. Interim relief was granted subject to deposit already made.
The High Court held that Rule 86A does not permit blocking of input tax credit beyond what is available in the electronic credit ledger. Artificial negative balances were ruled to be without jurisdiction.
Explains why general ITC entitlement under Section 16(1) is curtailed by specific blocks in Section 17(5), and how courts reconcile both within GST’s value-added framework.
The Appellate Authority clarified that refund-related queries are not among the issues specified for advance rulings under the CGST Act. The ruling underscores the limited scope of advance ruling jurisdiction.
This case explains situations where ITC is availed and utilised without receipt of goods or services. The ruling clarifies that such ITC is recoverable with interest and penalty under Section 74.
Courts hold that retrospective cancellation of a supplier’s registration alone is insufficient to deny ITC. Authorities must prove lack of transaction genuineness or buyer collusion.
This explains how ITC is wrongly denied when suppliers default or face retrospective cancellation. The key takeaway is that bona fide buyers cannot be penalized without proof of collusion.
This explains how ITC hinges on invoice matching and supplier tax payment under Section 16. The key takeaway is that credit can be denied even after payment unless statutory conditions are fully met.
The High Court ruled that Rule 86A cannot be invoked to block ITC beyond the balance available in the electronic credit ledger. Negative blocking was held to be without jurisdiction.
