GST
Penalty Paid Under Economic Duress Not Voluntary Admission Of Liability Under GST Act: Tripura High Court
The Tripura High Court recently held that payment of a penalty under economic duress cannot be treated as a “voluntary” admission of liability, and tax authorities remain legally obligated to pass a final, reasoned order under the Tripura State GST Act, 2017. The ruling came in the case of R G Group, a Tripura-based supplier of electrical goods, whose consignment was detained in July 2024 by GST enforcement officials over alleged expired E-Way bills and vehicle discrepancies. The Bench,...
Communication On Email Address Is Sufficient Service Under Section 169 GST Act: Delhi High Court
The Delhi High Court has held that under Section 169(1)(c) of the Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017, a communication sent to an email address provided at the time of GST registration is adequate service of a decision, order, summons or notice or any other communication.A division bench of Justices Prathiba M. Singh and Shail Jain observed,“With respect to Section169 of the Act, this Court has also taken a view recently in W.P. (C) 4374/2025 titled Rishi Enterprises through its Proprietor...
GST Department Must Decide Refund Applications Expeditiously, Any Delay Adversely Affects Business: Delhi High Court
The Delhi High Court has called upon the Goods and Services Tax Department to expeditiously process the refund applications filed by registered persons/ entities.A division bench of Justices Prathiba M. Singh and Shail Jain observed, “As per the statutorily prescribed procedure, the refund applications have to be dealt with in a particular manner within the prescribed timelines as per law…if there is delay by the Department in processing and granting refunds, it has a cascading adverse effect on...
Informer Of GST Evasion Cannot Seek Reward As A Matter Of Right: Delhi High Court
The Delhi High Court has prima facie observed that an informer, who apprises the Department about evasion of goods and services tax by an entity, cannot seek reward for sharing such information as a matter of right.A division bench of Justices Prathiba M. Singh and Shail Jain were of the prima facie view that no such right vests in any informer.“In the opinion of this Court, the grant of an award or a reward to an informer is a discretionary grant,” it said.The development comes in a petition...
GST Dept Can't Raise Fresh Demand U/S 73 If Explanation Offered By Assessee U/S 61(2) Was Accepted: Delhi High Court
The Delhi High Court has made it clear that Section 61(2) of the Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 bars further action against an assessee, including any demand under Section 73.For context, Section 61 empowers the proper officer to scrutinize the return furnished by the registered person and inform him of the discrepancies noticed.Sub-section (2) thereof provides that in case the explanation offered by the registered person is found to be acceptable, no further action shall be taken.A division...
Delhi High Court Sets Aside Reassessment Order Against Vedanta; Orders Fresh Consideration After GST Case Over Alleged ₹424-Crore ITC Fraud Closed
In granting relief to Vedanta Limited, the Delhi High Court has set aside an order of the the Income Tax Department for initiation of reassessment action against the Copper manufacturer, over alleged fraudulent availment of Input tax credit worth over ₹424 Crore.A division bench of Justices Prathiba M. Singh and Shail Jain observed that the GST Department had already closed the case.“Closing of the proceedings by the GST Department would have an impact and bearing on the Section 148A proceedings...
Refund Claims Are Time-Barred Despite Non-Obstante Clause U/S 142(5) CGST Act: CESTAT Rejects Mahindra Holidays' Appeal
The Chennai Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has stated that the Non-Obstante Clause in Section 142(5) of the CGST Act (Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017) cannot override the limitation under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act. Ajayan T.V. (Judicial Member) and M. Ajit Kumar (Technical Member) stated that section 142(5) does not refer to overriding any particular provision, and hence the non obstante clause has to be examined and given a...
Voluntary GST Cancellation Not Grounds To Freeze Company's Bank Account: Rajasthan High Court
The Rajasthan High Court has directed the Bank of Baroda to de-freeze the account of the petitioner-company, allowing it to use it freely till finally deciding the company's representation, observing that the bank could not freeze the account merely because the company's GST registration was voluntarily cancelled.The bench of Justice Nupur Bhati was hearing a petition filed by a company trading in goods which were exempted from the Goods and Services Tax, whose application for...
Payment Of Tax Cannot Legalise Unlicensed Activity, GST Registration Doesn't Confer Right To Conduct Business: J&K&L High Court
The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh has held that obtaining registration under the Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, does not amount to authorisation to conduct a trade or business, nor can payment of tax legitimise an otherwise unlicensed commercial activity.The High Court clarified that taxation statutes and regulatory licensing statutes operate in distinct spheres, and compliance with one cannot override mandatory licensing requirements under another.The Court was hearing a batch...
Customs | Confiscation, Penalty & Fine Can't Be Imposed On IGST Demand Arising From Breach Of Pre-Import Condition: CESTAT
The Mumbai Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has stated that confiscation, penalty & fine cannot be imposed on IGST (Integrated Goods and Services Tax) demand arising from breach of pre-import condition under Customs Act. Ajay Sharma (Judicial Member) and C J Mathew (Technical Member) opined that the IGST demand arose because of the breach of the pre-import condition. Although IGST is payable for such a breach, no confiscation or penalty can be ...
TNGST Act | Purchase Tax Cannot Be Levied on Buyer for Seller's Tax Default: Madras High Court
The Madras High Court on Monday held that purchase tax cannot be levied under Section 7A of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959 (TNGST Act) on the purchaser merely because the seller failed to pay tax. The bench, comprising Justices S M Subramaniam and Mohammed Shaffiq, clarified the scope of Section 7A in transactions where the vendor has defaulted on tax payments "Having found that the sale to petitioner is liable to tax in the hands of the petitioner's vendor, levy of purchase tax...
GST Levy On Group Health Insurance Policies Challenged; Kerala High Court Grants Interim Relief To Union Bank Pensioners
The Kerala High Court has granted interim relief to retired employees of the Union Bank by allowing them to renew their group health insurance policies without paying the 18% Goods and Services Tax (GST) on the premium.The Court passed the interim order in a writ petition filed by Vinod Mukundan and others, including the All India Union Bank Pensioners & Retirees Federation, challenging the levy of 18% GST on group health insurance policies. While the GST levy on individual health...