BLOGS

Circular No.: 215/9/2024-GSTDate: 26th June, 2024Subject: Clarification on taxability of salvage/ wreck value earmarked in the claim assessment of the damage caused to the motor vehicle Key Points and Clarifications: Background: This circular addresses the issue of whether the salvage or wreck value earmarked in the claim assessment for damage caused to a motor vehicle is subject to Goods and Services Tax (GST). Insurance companies, which provide general insurance services for motor vehicles, need clarity on the tax implications when they account for the salvage value during claim settlements. Key Provisions Involved: Section 7 of the CGST Act, 2017: Defines "supply" for the purposes of GST. Section 168(1) of the CGST Act, 2017: Empowers the Board to issue instructions and directions to GST officers to ensure uniformity in the implementation…

Circular No.: 213/07/2024-GSTDate: 26th June, 2024Subject: Clarification on the taxability of ESOP/ESPP/RSU provided by a company to its employees through its overseas holding company Key Points and Clarifications: Background: This circular addresses the taxability of Employee Stock Option Plans (ESOPs), Employee Stock Purchase Plans (ESPPs), and Restricted Stock Units (RSUs) provided by an Indian company to its employees through its overseas holding company. It aims to provide clarity on whether such transactions are liable to GST and under what conditions. Key Provisions Involved: Section 2(52) of the CGST Act, 2017: Defines "goods". Section 2(102) of the CGST Act, 2017: Defines "services". Schedule III of the CGST Act, 2017: Specifies activities or transactions which shall be treated neither as a supply of goods nor a supply of services. Section 168(1) of…

Circular No.: 212/6/2024-GSTDate: 26th June, 2024Subject: Mechanism for providing evidence of compliance with conditions of Section 15(3)(b)(ii) of the CGST Act, 2017 by the suppliers Key Points and Clarifications: Background: This circular addresses the mechanism for verifying the compliance with the conditions specified in Section 15(3)(b)(ii) of the Central Goods and Services Tax (CGST) Act, 2017, regarding the reversal of input tax credit (ITC) by recipients when suppliers offer post-supply discounts through tax credit notes. The aim is to ensure uniformity and clarity in the implementation of these provisions across all field formations. Key Provisions Involved: Section 15(3)(b)(ii) of the CGST Act, 2017: Specifies that the value of supply shall not include any discount given after the supply has been effected if the recipient reverses the ITC attributable to the…

Circular No.: 211/5/2024-GSTDate: 26th June, 2024Subject: Clarification on time limit under Section 16(4) of CGST Act, 2017 in respect of RCM supplies received from unregistered persons Key Points and Clarifications: Background: This circular addresses the applicability of the time limit specified under Section 16(4) of the Central Goods & Services Tax (CGST) Act, 2017 for the availment of input tax credit (ITC) by recipients on tax paid under the reverse charge mechanism (RCM) for supplies received from unregistered persons. It aims to ensure uniformity in the implementation of these provisions across all field formations. Key Provisions Involved: Section 16(4) of the CGST Act, 2017: Specifies the time limit for availing ITC. Section 31(3)(f) of the CGST Act, 2017: Requires registered persons to issue an invoice in respect of supplies received…

Circular No.: 210/4/2024-GSTDate: 26th June, 2024Subject: Clarification on valuation of supply of import of services by a related person where recipient is eligible to full input tax credit Key Points and Clarifications: Background: This circular addresses issues related to the valuation of imported services provided by a related person to a domestic entity, particularly when the domestic recipient is eligible for full input tax credit (ITC). It aims to ensure uniformity in implementing the provisions of the Central Goods and Services Tax (CGST) Act, 2017. Key Provisions and Rules Involved: Section 25(4) and (5) of the CGST Act, 2017: Defines distinct persons and related persons. Rule 28 of the CGST Rules, 2017: Specifies the value of supply of goods or services between distinct or related persons. Section 168(1) of the…

Circular No.: 209/3/2024-GSTDate: 26th June, 2024Subject: Clarification on the provisions of clause (ca) of Section 10(1) of the Integrated Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 relating to place of supply of goods to unregistered persons Key Points and Clarifications: Background: The Circular No. 209/3/2024-GST was issued to clarify the provisions of clause (ca) of Section 10(1) of the Integrated Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (IGST Act), which came into effect from 1st October 2023. This clause deals with determining the place of supply of goods when supplied to unregistered persons. Clause (ca) Details: Clause (ca) was inserted in Section 10(1) of the IGST Act, providing that: When goods are supplied to an unregistered person, the place of supply is the location as per the address recorded in the invoice…

CategoryRecommendationImpactInterest and Penalties WaiverWaiver of interest and penalties for demand notices under Section 73 for FY 2017-18, 2018-19, and 2019-20, if paid by 31.03.2025.This move aims to ease the financial burden on taxpayers who faced challenges during the initial years of GST implementation. Encourages voluntary compliance and reduces backlog of cases.Input Tax Credit (ITC) Time LimitTime limit to avail ITC for FY 2017-18, 2018-19, 2019-20, and 2020-21 is set to 30.11.2021.Provides clarity and relief to taxpayers who may have missed original deadlines, ensuring they can claim ITC due to them, promoting better cash flow management. For all the said years if the ITC is claimed by 30.11.2021, then credit will be allowed.Monetary Limits for AppealsMonetary limits for filing appeals: Rs. 20 lakh for GSTAT, Rs. 1 crore for High Court,…

CategoryRecommendationInterest and Penalties WaiverWaiver of interest and penalties for demand notices under Section 73 for FY 2017-18, 2018-19, and 2019-20, if paid by 31.03.2025.Input Tax Credit (ITC) Time LimitTime limit to avail ITC for FY 2017-18, 2018-19, 2019-20, and 2020-21 is set to 30.11.2021.Monetary Limits for AppealsMonetary limits for filing appeals: Rs. 20 lakh for GSTAT, Rs. 1 crore for High Court, and Rs. 2 crore for Supreme Court.Reduction of Pre-deposit for AppealsReduction in the pre-deposit amount required for filing appeals under GST.Amendments in Appeal FilingThree-month period for filing appeals in GSTAT will start from a date to be notified by the Government.Interest on Delayed ReturnsNo interest on delayed filing of returns if amount available in Electronic Cash Ledger on due date of filing the return.Sunset Clause for Anti-ProfiteeringNew applications…

Proposal of the Petroleum Ministry to bring ATF under GST at 5% and natural gas either at 12% or 18% Clarity on claiming ITC in several sectors where the industry has been facing issues Lay down a proposal on tax applicability on metal and steel scrap Consider a proposal to correct the inverted duty on as many as 14 items, including textiles, leather, pharma, engineering goods, etc. Clarifying norms on claiming and applicability of input tax credit on telecom services and spectrum charges To bring in further ease of doing business and better compliance Could bring a circular for clarity for global companies with branch offices in India and head offices abroad Clarifications are likely to be issued by the approval of the council for foreign airlines and shipping lines…

In the case of M. Trade Links Kerala HC, recognizing the challenges during the initial GST rollout, particularly the unavailability of GSTR 2A, allows liberty to assessees, who couldn’t claim ITC, taking the benefit of  Circular No. 183/15/2022- GST dated December 27, 2022 and Circular No. 193/05/2023- GST dated July 17, 2023, to submit their claims within 30 days from the judgment date, subject to review by GST authorities based on the scenarios specified in the Circulars; Clarifies that, for the period July 1, 2017 to November 30, 2022, the time limit for furnishing the return for the month of September is to be treated as November 30 in each financial year w.e.f. July 01, 2017, in respect of the Assesses who had filed their returns for the month of…

In the case of Veerprabhu Auto Pvt Ltd Gauhati HC noting that “prima facie appears that the provisions have not been adhered to by the respondents while issuing the demand”, orders stay on a demand of about Rs. 10.29 crores for violation of section 16 (4). Accordingly, while issuing notice directs “the impugned order of demand shall remain stayed” and lists after 4 weeks.

Read More

Instruction No. 01/2024-GST To address the issue of Proper Officers initiating recovery proceedings before 3 months from the date of service of demand order, CBIC issues instructions for early recovery u/s 78 of the CGST Act, 2017,  in the interest of revenue; Clarifies that in such cases, the jurisdictional Dy. or Asst. Commissioner of Central tax shall place the matter before the jurisdictional Principal Commissioner/Commissioner of Central Tax, who will be the ‘Proper Officer’,  along with evidence-backed reasons; Specifies that these reasons must clearly outline the circumstances prompting such  early payment, and might include reason of high risk to revenue due to following apprehensions— (i) potential  closure of business operations,  (ii) potential default due to financial decline or impending insolvency, or (iii) possible initiation of insolvency and bankruptcy proceedings;  Lays…

Faizal Traders Pvt.Ltd vs Deputy Commissioner, Central Tax and Central Excise Kerala HC upholds the validity of  Notification No. 13/2022-CT and Notification No. 09/2023, that extended the limitation period for passing assessment order u/s 73 for the FY 2017-18, finds that, same are not ultra vires the provisions of Section 168A of CGST/SGST Act; Observes that, these Notifications were issued purusant to SC directives in suo motu order, whereby a concious policy decision was taken to extend the limitation for issuance of orders in respect of demand linked with the due date of annual return, in view of impediments caused by Covid-19; Acknowledging that Covid-19 was a force majeure, and that Executive retains the discretion to extend the limitation period considering a force majeure event, finds “no substance” in assessee’s…

SC clarifies that “we have not stayed the operation of the impugned judgment/order and, therefore, taxes will have to be paid. In case the petitioner .. is aggrieved, appropriate orders will be passed in accordance with the law”.

Tvl. Cargotec India (P.) Ltd Recovery of amount - Recovery proceedings - Assessment orders were passed by respondent authority - Period of limitation for filing appeal was three months - However, recovery proceedings were initiated against petitioner-assessee even prior to expiry of three months - Amount was debited from Electronic Cash and Credit Ledgers of assessee - HELD : Proviso to section 78 could be invoked only if proper officer recorded in writing reason as to why he considers it expedient in interest of revenue to require taxable person to make payment even before expiry of prescribed three month period - In instant case, no material was placed on record to justify invoking proviso to section 78 - Respondent had failed to satisfactorily explain recourse to proviso to section 78…

Subhash Singh vs. Deputy Commissioner, SGST Uttarakhand HC citing appeal provisions modifies assessment order to the extent that “appellant will deposit 10% of the amount, which is being demanded by the respondents”; A demand of about Rs. 79 lakhs was raised by the Deputy Commissioner, SGST which was decreased to about Rs. 46 lakhs in the show cause notice and further to about Rs. 19 lakhs in the order; Assessee is into retail and wholesale business of iron scrap and waste; It purchased goods with proper invoices, and made proper payments through banking channels along with applicable GST coupled with recording of details of the invoices and the payment in its books of accounts; HC ruling in favour of assessee (the purchasing dealer) posits twin queries “If the appellant’s suppliers…

SC continues hearing the Petitioners in 200+ criminal writ petitions challenging  constitutional validity of 'Arrest’ provisions under GST and deliberates upon the need for incorporating safeguards against ‘Arrest’ under the GST law, embarks on doctrine of ‘checks and balances’ as far as the construct of the provision goes since it is seen that summons issued under section 70 are directly leading to arrest on the spot under section 69; Primarily, the Petitioners canvass arguments around powers of search, seizure, investigation, provisional attachment, arrest/authorization to arrest and even the initiation of proceedings having vested in  one ‘Proper Officer’; Further, ‘Power to Arrest’ being ‘exclusive’ and not ‘incidental’; Petitioners also identify gaps in ‘investigation’ mechanism and urge the Bench to examine power of tax authorities to ‘Arrest’ under GST and cite Radha…

in the case of Ram Agencies Assessees who are assigned to either Central Tax authorities or State Tax authorities under respective Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and/or State Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 cannot be subjected to further proceeding by counterparts under respective GST enactments. Centre/State GST Officers – Cross empowerment - Assessment years 2017-18 to 2019-20 - Assessee had challenged Order-in-Original for assessment years 2017-18, to 2019-20 - Specific case of assessee was that impugned order had been passed despite stay granted by instant court against extending period of limitation which had been stayed – Impugned order was further assailed on ground that assessee was assessed to State Tax Authorities and therefore, impugned order passed by Central Tax Authorities was contrary to law settled in Tvl.…

M/S Acme Cleantech Solutions Pvt Ltd v. Union of India M & C comment: High court stayed the CBIC circular which arbitrarily levies GST on personal guarantee or corporate guarantee given to banks or financial institutions. The circular says the personal guarantee (by director of the company) or corporate guarantee (one corporate to another corporate) given to banks or financial institutions shall be treated as supply even if made without consideration. This view of the Government will put many transactions under the scanner and litigations will only mount. The case: The petitioner filed a writ petition to challenge the part of the Circular issued by CBIC which clarified the taxability of corporate guarantees provided by a company. The challenge to the said Circular was on the ground that it seeks to…

Calcutta HC holds that to penalise the assessee (recipient) without causing enquiry with the supplier "would be arbitrary, illegal and without jurisdiction”, emphasizes "on the elementary principle" i.e. the necessity for the Department to conduct an inquiry with the supplier before penalizing the recipient by reversing ITC based on the allegation of non-remittance of tax by supplier to State exchequer; Allowing assessee’s appeal against the order passed in writ petition where the SCN was challenged, and the writ court initially issued directions without quashing the said SCN, HC remarks “decision in Suncraft…applies with full force to the case on hand.”; HC finds that Revenue authorities disregarded tax invoices and CA certificates produced by the assessee, opting instead to immediately proceed with reversal despite acknowledging that the assessee had already paid…

Read More

Chhattisgarh HC raps Revenue authorities for scheduling Mahindra’s personal hearing even before filing a reply to SCN, observes that Section 75(4) of the CGST Act was completely shelved by Authorities before the order in dispute was passed, sets-aside the order of the learned Single Judge; Opining that, when the assessee is burdened with a tax liability, the intent and the object of the statute are strictly to be complied with, HC renders it to be against the normal procedure that personal hearing is preponed even before the filing of reply as it is not expected that before the reply is filed, an assessee can be heard and thereafter the reply is filed and hence such action is superfluous;  HC explains that as the opportunity of hearing when is contemplated under…

APL Apollo Tubes Ltd. v. State Tax Officer (Intelligence) - [2024] The petitioner is engaged in the manufacture and supply of tubes and pipes of iron and steel. The department issued SCN and the petitioner replied to the same. Thereafter, the order was passed by the department. It filed writ petition to challenge the order and contended that the order was passed without recording proper reasons.The Honorable High Court noted that the petitioner had placed on record sample invoices and also bifurcated amounts paid towards freight for the Hosur unit, which is the relevant unit and enclosed both a reconciliation statement and a statement from the Chartered Accountant in respect of such bifurcation. However, the department recorded that the petitioner had not filed any documents or evidence with regard to…

The GST laws providesthat the principal can send the goods to the job worker under an intimation. In this regard, the CBIC has clarifiedthat the Form GST ITC-04 will serve as an intimation for the purpose of above provision. The principal is required to furnish the details of following delivery challans in Form GST ITC -04: (a) Goods which are dispatched by the principal to the Job worker (b) Goods which are received back from the job worker (c) Goods which are sent from one job worker to another job worker With effect from October 01, 2021, the frequency of filing Form GST ITC-04 has been reducedfrom quarterly basis to half yearly/yearly basis as under: SL. No.Aggregate turnover in preceding financial yearFrequencyDue date1More than 5 Crore rupeesHalf YearlyApril to September…

Telangana HC grants interim-relief in a writ petition filed by Zoomcar India challenging an order passed u/s 73 of the CGST Act, 2017 disallowing ITC on basis of mismatch between Form GSTR-2A and Form GSTR-3B; Petitioner argues that the pre-condition to avail ITC based on figures appearing in Form GSTR-2A contained in Section 16(2)(aa) was introduced w.e.f. January 1, 2022 and cannot be applied retrospectively and in this regard, refers to Calcutta HC decision in Suncraft Energy ; Hearing such contentions, HC states "till next date of hearing, no coercive steps be taken against the petitioner" pursuant to the said order and lists the matter on June 07.

Patna HC rules that "on furnishing of delayed returns, interest liability would be automatic, whether the payment be made from the Electronic Credit Ledger or Electronic Cash Ledger as per the provisions of Section 50(1)"; Dismisses writ petition challenging peremptory order of recovery in relation to interest passed by the Proper Officer;  Holds that furnishing of return results in ‘Payment of tax’ and not when deposit is made in cash ledger or remittances made on tax paid on purchases; Remarks "The deposit is akin to a current account maintained, from which debits have to be made for the purpose of payment of tax, interest, penalty or other amounts due under the Act. Such debits would be made and a resultant payment to the coffers of the State, only when a…

Where show cause notice issued in respect of disparity between GSTR-1 and GSTR-3B returns, assessee explained disparity by pointing out that error occurred on account of reflecting amount wrongly towards CGST and SGST instead of IGST, impugned order confirming demand was to be quashed, matter to be remanded subject to condition.

Tvl. Saravanaa Projects & Co. Turnover Discrepancies - Violation of Natural Justice - Petitioner-assessee was engaged in executing road contracts and civil contracts for Highways Department of the State of Tamil Nadu - Assessee received a show cause notice, citing approximately ten discrepancies - Assessee responded to notice, addressing each discrepancy - Assessee contended that their explanations were disregarded in assessment order- Revenue particularly emphasized defects regarding turnover discrepancies and erroneous entries in the GSTR 9C return HELD: Since no personal hearing was granted after assessee’s reply dated 12.12.2023 and principles of natural justice were not adhered to, impugned assessment order was to be quashed and assessee was directed to submit all relevant documents before revenue within a period of 15 days [Section 75 of Central Goods and Services Tax…

09/04/2024 Dear Taxpayers, GSTN is pleased to inform that a new feature to auto-populates the HSN-wise summary from e-Invoices into Table 12 of GSTR-1 is now available on the GST portal. This allows for direct auto-drafting of HSN data into Table 12 based on e-Invoice data. Please note that the HSN-wise summary data auto-populated into Table 12 is intended for your convenience. Please ensure that you reconcile the data with your records before its final submission. Any discrepancies or errors should be manually corrected or added in Table 12 before final submission. Thanking you,Team GSTN

09/04/2024 Dear Taxpayers, This has reference to the facility for re-filing of GSTR-3B for some of the taxpayers. It was noticed that there were discrepancies in the returns of some taxpayers during the filing process between the saved data in the GST system and actually filed data in the fields of ITC availment and payment of tax liabilities. The matter was examined and deliberated by the Grievance Redressal Committee of the GST Council and as a facilitation measure the Committee decided that these returns shall be reset, in order to give opportunity to such taxpayers to correct the discrepancy. Accordingly, only the affected taxpayers have been communicated on their registered email-ids and the affected returns are visible on their respective dashboards for the purpose of refiling with the correct data.…

Kerala HC grants interim stay of further proceedings initiated pursuant to tsunami of summons issued by the  State Tax Officer (Investigation Branch), after the Pr. Addl DGGSTI has already closed the investigation; Challenging the unregulated use of power of summons, Petitioner (engaged in education sector) argues that the barrage of summons u/s 70 by the STO (Inv), during the pendency of SCNs since 2019, amounts to harassment, blatant abuse of power and non-compliance with CBIC’s Circulars/Instructions; Drawing attention of court to the incident where the STO (Inv) has openly threatened the assessee of dire consequences in he fails to appear despite having questioned the officer’s jurisdiction, Petitioner contends that the matter of unregulated power regarding issue of summons is currently pending consideration before the SC; Therefore, Petitioner pleas that the high-handedness of STO…

Read More

RankState/UTGST Revenue (March 2024) in Crore1Maharashtra27,6882Karnataka13,0143Gujarat11,3924Tamil Nadu110175Haryana95456Uttar Pradesh90877Delhi58208West Bengal54739Telangana539910Odisha510911Rajasthan479812Andhra Pradesh408213Madhya Pradesh397414Jharkhand324315Chhattisgarh314316Kerala259817Punjab209018Bihar199119Uttarakhand173020Assam154321Himachal Pradesh85222Jammu and Kashmir60123Goa56524Dadra and Nagar Haveli and Daman & Diu45225Sikkim30326Chandigarh23827Puducherry22128Center Jurisdiction22029Meghalaya21330Other Territory19631Arunachal Pradesh16832Tripura12133Nagaland8334Manipur6935Mizoram5036Ladakh4137Andaman and Nicobar Islands3238Lakshadweep2

The Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs, issued guidelines to ensure ease of doing business while conducting investigations involving regular taxpayers. Dated 30th March 2024, the document outlines specific procedures for Central Goods and Services Tax (CGST) field formations to follow: Jurisdictional Accountability: Commissionerates are tasked with developing intelligence, conducting searches, and completing investigations within their jurisdiction as defined in notification No. 2/2017-Central Tax. Approval Process for Investigations: Prior approval from the (Pr.) Commissioner is mandatory for initiating investigations, with specific scenarios requiring the zonal (Pr.) Chief Commissioner's written consent, including cases involving major industrial houses, matters with national implications, or issues before the GST Council. Collaboration and Information Sharing: When investigations concern taxpayers in different jurisdictions or are simultaneously undertaken by the…

As per the new provisions, payment to MSME will be allowed as deduction for Income Tax purpose in the year in which payment is made, if the payment is made beyond due date.  As per the new provisions, payment to MSME will be allowed as deduction for Income Tax purpose in the year in which payment is made, if the payment is made beyond due date. Steps to be followed to check if you have to make payment by 31st March 2024. 1) Login into this portal and enter the Udhayam number of your supplier https://udyamregistration.gov.in/Udyam_Verify.aspx 2) After entering the udhaym number and submit, details of the enterprise will be displayed. Check in the Section 'Enterprise Type', if the Enterprise Type is Micro or Small. If yes, then this section…

The judgement delivered by the High Court of Judicature at Madras, presided over by Hon'ble Mr. Justice C. Saravanan, addressed the issue of cross-empowerment of tax authorities under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act 2017 (CGST Act) and Tamil Nadu Goods and Services Tax Act 2017 (TNGST Act). The court considered a batch of writ petitions challenging the jurisdiction of the Central and State tax authorities over taxpayers assigned to one but subjected to actions by the other. The court examined the recommendations of the GST Council, the constitutional amendments that enabled the GST regime, and the division of taxpayer base between the central and state governments to ensure a single interface under GST. The court noted the issuance of Circular No.1/2017-GST for the division of taxpayer base and…

Thai Mookambikaa Ladies Hostel vs. UOI heading 9963 and is taxable at 18% GST; Carves an important angle that “imposition of GST on the Hostel accommodation should be viewed from the perspective of the recipient of service and not from the perspective of service provider” and places relying upon judgement in Taghar Vasudeva Ambrish case; Observes that “‘hostel services' provided by the petitioners to the girl students and working women will squarely amount to the 'residential dwelling' and accordingly, the same will be squarely covered under the Entry No.12 of Exemption Notification No.12 of 2017”; Finds it evident that the expression ‘residence’ and ‘dwelling’ have more or less the connotation in common parlance and therefore, no different meaning can be assigned to the expression ‘residential dwelling’ and accordingly, the same does include hostel which…

CBDT, vide Order dt. Mar 18, 2024, orders that all the Income Tax Offices across India shall remain open on Mar 29 to 31, 2024; CBDT issues this order to facilitate completion of pending departmental work as FY 2023-24 closes on Mar 31, 2024, which is Sunday whereas Mar 30 and Mar 29 are Saturday and a closed holiday, respectively. 

SC 9-Judge Bench concludes hearing the submissions on behalf of private parties and PSUs in the 9 judge Constitutional Bench matter on the issue of nature of ‘royalty’ payable to State Government u/s 9 of Mines & Minerals (Regulation & Development) Act, 1957; Reference is made to 9-judge bench in view of conflict between 7-judge bench decision in the case of India Cement Ltd. and 5-judge bench decision in the case of Kesoram Industries Ltd.; The ongoing marathon hearing is about States’ power to tax mineral rights and other substantive issues pertaining to (i) power of State Legislature to levy tax on land under Entry 49 List II, (ii) meaning of taxation on mineral rights subject to limitations imposed by Parliament by law relating to mineral development under Entry 50 of List of Seventh Schedule, (iii) construction of expression “tax on land…

In the case of Anurag Garodia Calcutta HC deems as ‘a colorable exercise of power’ the manner in which Assistant Commissioner of State Tax (Revenue) passed final order u/s 73 “without granting extension to the petitioner either to file its response or to be offered personal hearing, despite the petitioner showing sufficient cause,”; Rules that once, the Assessee had sought for an extension to file reply to show cause notice (SCN) Revenue was obliged to consider such extension application and ought not to have passed the final order; Perusing SCN, HC observes that Revenue had granted liberty to the Assessee to file its response on/or before October 25, 2023, though personal hearing was offered only on October 10, 2023; Considers Assessee’s stance that immediately after reopening of the office of the Authority…

It is informed to all taxpayers that as per Notification No. 26/2022 – Central Tax dated 26th December 2022 two new Table 14A and Table 15A have been introduced in GSTR-1 to capture the amendment details of the supplies made through e-commerce operators (ECO) on which e-commerce operators are liable to collect tax under section 52 or liable to pay tax u/s 9(5) of the CGST Act, 2017. These tables have now been made live on the GST common portal and will be available in GSTR-1/IFF from February 2024 tax period onwards. These amendment tables are relevant for those taxpayers who have reported the supplies in Table 14 or Table 15 in earlier tax periods. Please click here to view the complete advisory on the captioned subject.Team GSTN

https://www.gst.gov.in/newsandupdates/read/626

Madras HC quashes assessment orders owing to ‘patent errors’ like (i) imposing GST at the rate of 36% instead of applicable rate of 18% (ii) non-consideration of variance in turnover for an entity operating in multiple States in India, as reflected in the financial statements, and the turnover attributable to its operations in Tamil Nadu; Accordingly, disposes of writ petition.

In the matter of Max Health Care Institute Ltd Delhi HC quashes order passed imposing demand u/s 73 of the CGST Act as unsustainable, holds that the Proper Officer has not applied his mind to the Assessee’s reply and didn’t consider it on merits; Thus, remands the matter for re-adjudication with a direction that hearing opportunity shall be granted and a fresh speaking order u/s 75(3) of the CGST Act shall be passed; As regards the Officer’s stance that reply to SCN was unsatisfactory, HC opines that the reply is a detailed reply and the Proper Officer had to at least consider the reply on merits and then form an opinion whether the reply was devoid of merits; Observes that if the Proper Officer was of the view that further details…

In the case of Hindustan Unilever Limited Rajasthan HC, in petitions challenging the workability of section 15(3)(b)(ii) of the CGST Act, 2017 due to the absence of a matching mechanism between a supplier's credit note and the reversal of ITC by recipient/customer, refuses to grant absolute stay of the entire demand raised against HUL and Tata Motors; Opines that while the provision may seem “a harsh provision” by requiring suppliers to provide evidence of ITC reversal by customers w.r.t post sales discount given by supplier, “.. it being a tax statute, one may not jump to the conclusion that the provision suffers from manifest arbitrariness”; Assessees argued that since the matching mechanism u/s 43 was omitted, they're burdened with an impossible task of producing statutory records of the recipient's electronic credit ledger for proof of reversal, making the current process manifestly arbitrary;…

Madras HC quashes assessment orders rejecting Input Tax Credit (ITC) of assessee entirely on the ground that the GSTR-3B returns did not reflect the ITC claim; Perusing the operative portion of assessment order, HC observes that when the registered person asserts that he is eligible for ITC by referring to GSTR-2A and GSTR-9 returns, the assessing officer should examine whether the ITC claim is valid by examining all relevant documents, including by calling upon the registered person to provide such documents; Thus, permits assessee to place all documents pertaining to its ITC claims before the assessing officer, directs assessing office to pass fresh assessment orders.

Read More

Allahabad HC quashes the penalty imposed u/s 129(3) of the CGST Act for carrying e-invoice without the signatures of authorised signatory, underscores the statutory scheme that as per fifth proviso to Rule 46 of the CGST Rules, 2017 “the requirement of signatures is dispensed with as regards digital invoice”; Noting that not only the driver of vehicle carrying the goods was carrying e-invoice and e-way bill (EWB) in his mobile, but at the time of interception by Mobile Squads, the representative of assessee also reached and produced hard copies of same documents, and therefore, “there was no cause for detention, seizure or imposition of the penalty as has been done by the authorities in this case.”; Emphasizing on the responsibility of the Revenue to verify digital copies, the court notes…

Gujarat HC allows refund of IGST paid on ocean freight in light of Top Court’s dicta in case of Mohit Minerals which struck down the levy stemming from Notification No.10/2017 dated June 28, 2017 (IGST Reverse Charge Notification); In turn, allows refund to assessee basis principle of unjust enrichment and clarifies that when the IGST Reverse Charge Notification for levy of IGST on ocean freight is held to be unconstitutional, assessee/ importer is entitled to the refund of such IGST on ocean freight paid under protest; Citing ‘trite law’ that “once the Apex Court declares a Notification being ultra vires and unconstitutional, such law becomes the law of land and is liable to be followed by the respondent authorities without raising any objection.” observes that the Assistant Commissioner of CGST and Central Excise (Revenue)…