GST Authorities Cannot Assume Jurisdiction For Passing Adverse Orders For Work Concluded Under VAT Regime: Allahabad High Court

The Allahabad High Court has held that GST Authorities cannot claim jurisdiction for levying tax, penalty, and interest on work that was concluded prior to the implementation of the GST Act. Notices were issued to the petitioner, a work contractor, for the Financial Year 2018-19 under the GST Act. The petitioner was unable to reply to the notices in time. Consequently, an ex-parte order was passed, levying tax, penalty and interest on him. Aggrieved, he sought relief before the High...

GST Department To Re-Inspect Changed Place Of Business Before GST Registration Cancellation: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court, in a matter concerning retrospective cancellation of registration despite having amended place of business, directed “The GST Department may re-inspect the new premises of the Petitioner and obtain a physical inspection report.” The Division Bench, comprising Justice Prathiba M. Singh and Justice Shail Jain stated that the officials of the GST Department ought to have re-inspected the new premises for Show Cause Notice proceedings to continue. It was also noted...

CGST Act | Bombay High Court Stays GST Demand Order Over Delayed Service Of Showcause Notice

The Bombay High Court granted ad-interim relief to the assessee by staying the operation of a GST Demand Order The Bench of Justice B.P. Colabawalla & Amit S. Jamsandekar was hearing a writ preferred by the assessee seeking to quash the GST demand order challenging the Show Case Notice to be time barred per Section 73(2) and 73(10) of the Central Goods and Services Tax (CGST) Act, 2017. The Petitioner argued that the Show Cause Notice did not follow the mandatory provisions...

Use Of Word 'Determined' In SCN Shows Pre-Determination; S.74 Invocation Unsustainable: Madras High Court Quashes GST Demand

The Madras High Court has held that using the word 'Determined' in the show cause notice (SCN) betrays an element of pre-determination on the part of the authority. The bench highlighted that the show cause notice must clearly specify whether the assessee is being charged with fraud, suppression or wilful misstatement to invoke section 74 of the Tamil Nadu Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The bench stated that the authority has used the word “determined”. There is an ocean of...

Delhi High Court Quashes VAT Assessment Orders Passed By Audit Officer Citing Lack Of Jurisdiction

The Delhi High Court has quashed a batch of VAT assessment orders issued by VAT Audit Officer, stating that the authority did not have necessary delegation to carry out assessments.Form DVAT-50 enables the VAT Commissioner to authorize officials for carrying out audit, investigation and enforcement functions under Delhi Value Added Tax Act and Rules.However, a division bench of Justices Prathiba M. Singh and Shail Jain noted that no such authorization was made in favour of VATO (Audit) before...

Delhi High Court Grants Interim Relief To Aadhar India Over Non-Issuance Of Pre-Show Cause Notice Intimation In GST Case

The Delhi High Court, while examining whether pre-consultation prior to a GST Show Cause Notice was mandatory or discretionary, granted interim relief to Aadhar India by permitting the proceedings arising from the Show Cause Notice dated 29 November 2024 to continue, but directing that any final order passed pursuant thereto should not be given effect without further orders of the Court.The Division Bench, comprising Justice Prathiba M. Singh and Justice Shail Jain, heard a writ petition...

Affidavit Of Cost Accountant In Personal Hearing Cannot Be Ignored When Facts Are Admitted By State Tax Officer: Kerala High Court

The Kerala High Court has held that an affidavit by professionals, such as a cost accountant, given during a personal hearing, cannot be ignored, especially when a state tax officer admits facts referred therein. Justice Ziyad Rahman A.A. stated that when a professional swears an affidavit before this Court, highlighting the matters that transpired during the course of the hearing, the same cannot be simply ignored, particularly in a situation where, to some extent, there is an...

KVAT Act | Permission For Compounding Tax Cannot Be Cancelled For Suppression; Only Suppressed Turnover Can Be Taxed: Kerala High Court

The Kerala High Court has held that under the KVAT Act (Kerala Value Added Tax Act, 2003), the assessing authority cannot cancel permission to pay tax at compounding rates for suppression in the same year it was opted, and only the suppressed turnover can be taxed at normal rates. Justice M.A. Abdul Hakhim opined that cancellation proceedings are still pending, and the cancellation is not carried out, and the assessment is not concluded on a best judgment assessment basis. In such a...

Two Days Delay In Paying Last Instalment Under VAT Amnesty Scheme Owing To Technical Glitch Is Condonable: Gujarat High Court

The Gujarat High Court has extended benefit of Amnesty Scheme under the Gujarat Value Added Tax (GVAT) Act, 2003 to dealer who was precluded from making full payment under the Scheme on account of 'automatic' re-adjustment of instalment amount. The Division Bench, comprising Justice Bhargav D. Karia and Justice Pranav Trivedi set aside rejection of application under the Scheme noting that non-payment of differential amount was only due to technical glitches of the online portal. The...

Audit Assessment Under Orissa VAT Act Is Invalid If Audit Visit Report Is Time-Barred: High Court

The Orissa High Court has held that an audit assessment under Section 42 of the OVAT Act (Odisha Value Added Tax Rules, 2005) cannot be initiated when the AVR (Audit Visit Report) is beyond the limitation period. Chief Justice Harish Tandon and Murahari Sri Raman were examining whether the Assessing Authority has jurisdiction to proceed with Audit Assessment under Section 42 of the OVAT Act by issuing of statutory notice in Form VAT-306 on the basis of the AVR submitted under Section...

Cancelled GST Registration Cannot Be Restored Solely To Claim ITC Benefit U/S 16(6) CGST Act: Kerala High Court

The Kerala High Court has held that a cancelled GST registration cannot be restored solely to claim the ITC (Input Tax Credit) benefit under Section 16(6) CGST Act (Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017). Section 16(6) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, enables the taxpayer to claim the input tax credit available in the ledger, in case the order cancelling the registration is revoked by any order, either under Section 30 or pursuant to any order made by the appellate...

Centre Cannot Retain Wrongly Paid IGST Once Correct Tax Is Paid To State GST Authorities: Karnataka High Court

The Karnataka High Court has held that the Centre cannot retain wrongly paid IGST (Integrated Goods and Services Tax) once the correct tax is paid to the State authorities. Justice S.R. Krishna Kumar observed that since the assessee had wrongly paid IGST and later paid the correct tax to the State GST, the Central government must refund IGST to the assessee. The assessee/appellant is a Science and Technology Company operating across healthcare, life science and electronics and has...