GST
GST Act | Orissa High Court Quashes Recovery Proceedings Premised On 'Mistaken Identity' After Verifying Payment Receipt From Bank
The Orissa High Court in a matter involving 'mistaken identity' where one individual was assessed despite having a cancelled registration number (GSTIN), has quashed Show Cause Notice under Section 73 of the CGST Act, 2017. A Division Bench comprising Chief Justice Harish Tandon and Justice Murahari Sri Raman noted the 'mistaken fact' in Section 73 adjudication proceedings. It was clarified that Section 73 was invoked on the premise there was an alleged mismatch in figures disclosed by...
Writ Petition Not Maintainable After GSTAT Becomes Functional; Assessees Must Avail Remedy U/S 112 GST Act: Orissa High Court
The Orissa High Court has dismissed two writ petitions filed under the Goods and Services Tax (GST) regime, holding that the availability and operationalisation of the statutory appellate remedy before the Goods and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal (GSTAT) bars the exercise of writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution. In Amit Kumar Das v. Joint Commissioner of State Tax, the petitioner had challenged an assessment order passed under Section 73 of the CGST/OGST Acts for...
“Illegal, Arbitrary & Colourable Exercise Of Power": Karnataka High Court Quashes Consolidated GST Show Cause Notice Clubbing Multiple FYs
The Karnataka High Court held that issuing a consolidated show cause notice for multiple financial years is illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the provisions of the CGST Act. The bench opined that a composite notice for multiple financial years enables the Department to blur the statutory distinction between Section 73 (non-fraud, etc.,- 3 year limitation) and Section 74 (fraud etc., - 5 year limitation). If certain years fall under Section 73, but the entire block is treated under ...
IGST Act | Place Of Supply Depends On Where Movement Terminates, Not Where Goods Were Handed To Carrier: Karnataka High Court
The Karnataka High Court held that for the purpose of determining the place of supply under Section 10(1)(a) of the IGST Act, the factor is the location where the movement of goods terminates for delivery to the recipient and not the place where the goods are handed over to the common carrier. Section 10(1)(a) of the Integrated Goods and Services Tax (IGST) Act, 2017, provides that the place of supply for goods that are moved, whether by the supplier, recipient, or another party, is...
GST Authorities Have No Power To Seal Cash During Search: Calcutta High Court Orders De-Sealing Of ₹24 Lakh
The Calcutta High Court held that the GST authorities do not have the power under Section 67 of the CGST Act to seal or seize cash. Accordingly, the bench directed the immediate de-sealing of Rs. 24 lakhs. Section 67 of the Central Goods and Services Tax (CGST) Act, 2017, grants tax authorities the powers of inspection, search, and seizure to prevent tax evasion and ensure compliance. Justice Om Narayan Rai examined whether the GST authorities have the power to seize cash under...
Packing Materials Are Integral Part Of Cement Sales, Cannot Be Taxed Separately At Different Rates: Patna High Court
In a ruling on sales tax valuation under the Bihar Finance Act, 1981, the Patna High Court has held that packing materials used for cement, such as gunny bags and HDPE bags, form an integral part of cement sales and cannot be subjected to separate tax rates distinct from the cement itself. The Division Bench of Justice Bibek Chaudhuri and Justice Dr. Anshuman dismissed a batch of miscellaneous appeals filed by ACC Limited. The appeals pertained to multiple assessment years ranging from...
GST | Cannot Seek Pre-Arrest Bail At Stage Of Summons, Delhi High Court Dismisses Plea By Tobacco Trader
The Delhi High Court has dismissed Writ Petitions challenging GST Summons issued by the Enforcement Agency, Directorate General of Goods and Services Tax Intelligence (DGGI) alleging clandestine trading of tobacco on 'merits'. In a judgment delivered on December 16, 2025, Justice Neena Bansal Krishna, deliberated on the interplay between Section 70 of the CGST Act, 2017 and Section 193 and Section 228 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. The Delhi High Court made observations on how 'Summons'...
Non-Availability Of GSTAT Cannot Be Used To Bypass Mandatory Pre-Deposit U/S 112(8) CGST Act: Orissa High Court
The Orissa High Court held that while a writ petition may be entertained when the Goods and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal (GSTAT) is not constituted or functional, such non-availability cannot be used to bypass the mandatory pre-deposit under Section 112(8) of the CGST Act. Section 112(8) of the Central Goods and Services Tax (CGST) Act, 2017, outlines the mandatory pre-deposit conditions that an appellant must meet to file an appeal with the Goods and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal...
Clause 8 Of Assam GST Reimbursement Scheme Prima Facie Ultra Vires: Gauhati High Court Stays SCN Against Patanjali Foods
The Gauhati High Court found that Clause 8 of the Assam Industries [Tax Reimbursement for Eligible Units] Scheme, 2017, which restricts input tax credit, runs contrary to the Constitutional framework and the provisions of the CGST Act. Consequently, the bench stayed the operation of the show-cause notices (SCN) issued to Patanjali Foods Limited. Justice Manish Choudhury was addressing a case in which Patanjali Foods Limited, the assessee, challenged the constitutional validity of...
Cryptic Show Cause Notice Without Factual Details Invalidates GST Registration Cancellation: Gauhati High Court
The Gauhati High Court held that a GST registration cannot be cancelled on the basis of a cryptic show cause notice, which merely quotes statutory provisions without disclosing the factual grounds. Justice Sanjay Kumar Medhi noted that apart from stating the provisions of Section 29(2)(e) of the CGST Act, there are no facts or any details stated in the show cause notice. In the case at hand, the assessee's/petitioner's GST registration was cancelled through a show cause notice. An...
CGST Act | Once Returns Are Filed Within Time Period U/S 16(5), Limitation U/S 16(4) Loses Significance: Kerala High Court Allows ITC Claim
The Kerala High Court held that Section 16(5) of the CGST Act (Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017), being a non-obstante provision, overrides the time limit prescribed under Section 16(4) once returns are filed within the cut-off date specified therein. Section 16(4) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 specifies that no registered person can take Input Tax Credit (ITC) for any invoice or debit note issued against the supply of goods or services after the due date for...
Homeopathic Medicines Having Single, Two Or More Constituents Attract 5% GST Post Rate-Revision: West Bengal AAR
The West Bengal Authority for Advance Ruling (AAR) has held that homeopathic medicines having a single, two or more components formulated exclusively in alignment with the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, irrespective of retail sale, attracted 5% GST. In a ruling by Shri. Shafeeq S (Member- Central Tax) and Shri. Jaydip Kumar Chakrabarti (Member-State Tax) from the two Tariff Entries 3003 and 3004 inferred that medicines manufactured by the Applicant consisted of two or more constituents mixed ...