Madras High Court Upholds Same-Month ISD Credit Rule Under CGST, Dismisses Reliance Jio's Challenge

The Madras High Court on 5 March upheld the validity of Rule 39(1)(a) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017, which mandates that an Input Service Distributor (ISD) must allocate tax credits within the same month in which an invoice is received. A Bench comprising Chief Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava and Justice G. Arul Murugan was hearing a batch of writ petitions filed by Reliance Jio Infocomm Ltd, challenging the provision governing the timing of distribution of Input Service...

Gujarat High Court Grants Bail To Lawyer Accused Of Filing GST Return For 'Non-Existent, Fake Entities'

The Gujarat High Court recently granted bail to an advocate who was arrested for allegedly filing GST returns for firms that are claimed to be non-existent, fake entities.Sanghani has been booked under Sections 132 (1)(b) (whoever issues any invoice or bill without supply of goods or services or both in violation of the provisions of the Act, or the rules made thereunder leading to wrongful availment or utilisation of input tax credit or refund of tax), and 132 (1) (c) (whoever avails input tax...

Affiliation Fees Collected By Universities From Colleges Liable To GST: Madras High Court

The Madras High Court has held that affiliation fees collected by universities from colleges are liable to Goods and Services Tax (GST). The Court ruled that such services do not fall within the GST exemption for services relating to the admission of students or the conduct of examinations.The Division Bench comprising Justice G. Jayachandran and Justice K. K. Ramakrishnan answered a reference arising from writ petitions filed by Bharathidasan University challenging GST notices issued by the...

Electronic Credit Ledger Cannot Be Blocked Beyond One Year Under CGST Rules: Karnataka High Court

The Karnataka High Court on 25 February, held that the restriction imposed by blocking a taxpayer's electronic credit ledger under Rule 86A of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017, cannot continue beyond one year, and any continuation of such blocking after the statutory period is illegal. Justice S. Sunil Dutt Yadav was hearing a writ petition filed by Jupiter Ventures challenging the action of the tax authorities in blocking its Electronic Credit Ledger on 21 November 2024. The...

Assessment Order Against Deceased Person Without Hearing Legal Heirs Invalid: Rajasthan High Court

The Rajasthan High Court on 26 February, held that assessment proceedings cannot be validly continued or concluded against the legal heirs of a deceased taxpayer under Section 93 of the CGST Act, which limits liability to the estate inherited, unless the authorities comply with mandatory principles of natural justice, including issuance of a proper notice and grant of an opportunity of hearing to the legal representative. A Bench of Acting Chief Justice Sanjeev Prakash Sharma and Justice...

GST Payable Separately On Municipal Works Contracts Unless Tender Includes It: Kerala High Court

The Kerala High Court, on 12 February, held that contractors executing works for local self-government institutions are entitled to payment of GST over and above the contract value, and that such tax cannot be treated as included in the quoted rates unless the tender conditions expressly so provide. Harisankar V. Menon stated that once government circulars categorically mandate that tendered rates for public works are to be quoted exclusive of GST, the municipality cannot subsequently treat GST...

Naming Judges In Affidavits Is “Totally Uncalled For”: Allahabad High Court

Recently, the Allahabad High Court strongly criticised the practice of naming judges in affidavits. Justice Samit Gopal, was hearing a case concerning tax evasion by a Chinese national residing temporarily in Greater Noida, where the Assistant Commissioner, CGST, in his affidavit, had mentioned the names of the judges whose judgments were cited. The Court observed: “This system of mentioning the names of Hon'ble Judges while giving reference to the judgments is totally uncalled for.” Alice...

Check-Posts Cannot Value or Confiscate Goods in Transit: Andhra Pradesh High Court

The Andhra Pradesh High Court has held that authorities stationed at GST check-posts lack jurisdiction to examine the valuation of goods or to confiscate and levy penalties merely because the goods are in transit. The Bench comprising Justice R. Raghunandan Rao and Justice T.C.D. Sekhar, observed that disputes relating to valuation and tax liability must be examined only by the jurisdictional assessing authority and not by proceedings initiated at the stage of interception under Sections 129 or...

Expired E-Way Bill Does Not Justify Harsh Penalty Under GST Law: Gujarat High Court Orders ₹18 Lakh Refund

The Gujarat High Court has ordered refund of Rs. 18,00,140 collected as penalty from Balkrishna Industries Limited, holding that imposition of penalty merely because an e-way bill expired during transit was unsustainable in the facts of the case. A Division Bench of Justice A.S. Supehia and Justice Pranav Trivedi held that “In wake of such undisputed fact, the imposition of harsh penalty under Section 129(3) of the CGST Act was uncalled for and is also beyond the scope of Section 129(1)(a) of...

Supreme Court Issues Notice In Zoomcar Plea Over Denial Of Appeal Against GST Order By Rajasthan High Court

The Supreme Court on Wednesday issued notice on a special leave petition filed by Zoomcar India Pvt. Ltd., a self-drive car rental platform, challenging a Rajasthan High Court order that disposed of its writ petition without granting liberty to pursue a statutory appeal under the GST law. A bench of Justice J.B. Pardiwala and Justice K.V. Viswanathan heard the matter and directed the issuance of notice. Zoomcar had approached the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan challenging...

GSTAT Delhi Orders Panchsheel Buildtech To Return ₹98 Lakh To Homebuyers In Anti-Profiteering Case

The Delhi Bench of the Goods and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal (GSTAT) on 20 February upheld an anti-profiteering charge against Panchsheel Buildtech Pvt. Ltd. and directed it to return Rs. 98 lakh to homebuyers of its three Noida-based residential projects. Technical Member A. Venu Prasad found the company liable for profiteering for non-passing of the benefit of additional Input Tax Credit to homebuyers as required under Section 171 of the CGST Act, 2017. The Tribunal held that Section...

Order Passed In Fraud Proceedings Cannot Be Reclassified To Avail Amnesty Scheme: Gujarat High Court

The Gujarat High Court held that an order passed under Section 74 of the CGST Act, 2017 involving allegations of fraud, misstatement or suppression of facts cannot be converted into a non-fraud order under Section 73 merely to enable the taxpayer to claim relief under the GST Amnesty Scheme, in the absence of documentary evidence disproving such allegations. A Bench comprising Justice A.S. Supehia and Justice Pranav Trivedi, by its order dated 13 February 2026, rejected the plea of R.B. Pandey...