Goods and Services Tax : Section 74A replaces the earlier Sections 73 and 74, creating a unified framework for tax recovery in cases of short payment, erro...
Goods and Services Tax : This case explains situations where ITC is availed and utilised without receipt of goods or services. The ruling clarifies that su...
Goods and Services Tax : Highlights how authorities routinely invoke Section 74 without evidence of fraud and explains courts’ stance that such notices a...
Goods and Services Tax : Understand the process of GST intimation in Form DRC-01A, issued for tax discrepancies. Learn about the parts of DRC-01A, applicab...
Goods and Services Tax : Calcutta High Court stays a GST order, citing no force majeure for time limit extension under Section 73(9) of the CGST Act for FY...
Goods and Services Tax : KSCAA represents to the Finance Minister on the misapplication of GST Section 74 notices for small demands, urging restriction to ...
Goods and Services Tax : KSCAA highlights practical GST challenges in Sec 128A & Sec 16(4), urging clarifications on appeals, ITC, interest waivers, and mu...
Goods and Services Tax : The Madras High Court held that clubbing five assessment years in a single GST show cause notice is contrary to Section 73 of the ...
Goods and Services Tax : The Madras High Court held that an order under Section 74 cannot be passed when the notice was issued under Section 73. The matter...
Service Tax : CESTAT Kolkata held that the respondent had paid the Service Tax before availing CENVAT credit on the disputed invoices. Finding n...
Corporate Law : The Madras High Court held that courts are empowered under Section 73 of the Evidence Act to compare disputed and admitted signatu...
Service Tax : The Gauhati High Court held that the extended limitation under Section 73 cannot be invoked without specific findings of fraud, su...
Goods and Services Tax : New GST circular clarifies payment via GSTR-3B for Section 128A benefits, and appeal withdrawals for mixed period demands....
Goods and Services Tax : Learn about the Kerala SGST Act's interest and penalty waiver under Section 128A, eligibility, application process, and compliance...
Goods and Services Tax : Kerala SGST issues guidelines on issuing separate notices for Sections 73 and 74. Ensures clarity and uniformity in handling GST d...
The High Court ruled that Rule 86A does not permit blocking of input tax credit beyond what is available in the electronic credit ledger. Creating a negative balance was held to be without jurisdiction.
The issue was whether CBIC notifications could extend limitation for orders under Section 73. The Court held the notifications illegal and directed fresh adjudication after treating prior orders as show cause notices.
The High Court set aside a GST demand after finding that tax proceedings were initiated against the wrong person due to clerical errors. The ruling underscores that adjudication based on incorrect identity cannot be sustained.
The High Court held that once the GST Appellate Tribunal is operational and appeal timelines are notified, disputes must be pursued before the tribunal. Taxpayers must comply with statutory pre-deposit requirements under Section 112 before filing appeals.
The case involved a challenge to an assessment order that was later revised under rectification provisions. The Court ruled that once rectified, the original demand ceases to exist and cannot be separately challenged.
The High Court held that export refunds cannot be denied based on alleged excess ITC without issuing an SCN under the CGST Act. The ruling reinforces that recovery proceedings must follow statutory procedure.
The High Court declined to retain the writ once the GST Appellate Tribunal became operational. The dispute was directed to be resolved through the statutory appellate mechanism.
The High Court held that GST demands for periods prior to approval of a resolution plan cannot survive once the plan is sanctioned under the IBC. Past statutory dues not forming part of the plan stand extinguished and cannot be enforced.
The Tribunal remanded the MAT issue after noting lack of factual verification on whether reserve withdrawals were credited to the P&L account. Key takeaway: MAT adjustments under section 115JB require strict, evidence-based verification.
The issue was whether GST show cause notices could be quashed at the threshold. The High Court held that alleged procedural lapses can be raised before the adjudicating authority, not in writ proceedings.
