S.74 CGST Act | Consolidated SCN For Multiple Financial Years Necessary To Establish Wrongful Availment Of ITC: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court has held that consolidated show cause notice under Section 74 of the CGST is not only permissible but necessary, to unearth wrongful availment of ITC over a span of period.A division bench of Justices Prathiba M. Singh and Rajneesh Kumar Gupta observed,“The nature of ITC is such that fraudulent utilization and availment of the same cannot be established on most occasions without connecting transactions over different financial years. The purchase could be shown in one...

Delhi High Court Reprimands GST Dept For Raiding Lawyer's Office, Seizing Computer Over Client's Tax Case

The Delhi High Court has pulled up the GST Department for harassing a tax lawyer, by raiding his offices and seizing his files and electronic gadgets, in connection with alleged GST evasion by one of his clients.A division bench of Justices Prathiba M. Singh and Shail Jain observed that unless the Department has some material to indicate the lawyer's involvement in alleged tax evasion, it cannot take such steps against him.“The Advocate cannot be subjected to harassment in this manner unless and...

[CGST Act] Penalty Is An 'Additional Tax', Cannot Be Levied Under State Act Without 'Charging Provision': J&K&L High Court

The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court has ruled that the penalty under the Central Sales Tax Act cannot be imposed by invoking provisions of the State Act in the absence of an express charging section.The Court held that the Central Act is a “self-contained code” and provides its own framework for imposition of penalties, which cannot be supplemented by state laws.A bench headed by Justice Sanjeev Kumar, Justice Sanjay Parihar dismissed the petition challenging the absence of a penalty...

S.129 CGST Act | Assessee Doesn't Waive Right To Challenge Levy By Mere Payment Of Penalty To Release Goods : Supreme Court

The proceedings conclude only as per a formal order passed under S.129(3) of the Act, the Court held.

Karnataka High Court Directs GST Department To Establish Tracking System For Notices Sent To Taxpayers Via Email

The Karnataka High Court has directed the GST department to establish tracking system for notices sent to the taxpayers via email Justice Suraj Govindaraj stated that it is required for the department to establish a system to ascertain delivery of e-mail notices, when the said e-mail was opened and when the email was read. In this case, the assessee/petitioner has challenged the adjudication orders under 73 of CGST Act, 2017 for the period April 2020- March 2021. The assessee ...

IGST Not Leviable On Secondment Of Employee From Overseas Group Companies: Karnataka High Court

The Karnataka High Court held that IGST is not leviable on secondment arrangement with overseas entities. Justice Sachin Shankar Magadum was addressing the issue of whether a secondment constitutes a taxable supply of manpower services or a non-taxable employer-employee relationship exempt under Schedule III of the CGST Act. In this case, the during the period from July 2017 to March 2023, the assessee avers that employees of its overseas group companies were seconded to work in ...

GST Officers Issuing Summons/Arrest Memo Not Required To Be Cross-Examined By Assessee: Gujarat High Court

The Gujarat High Court held that GST officers issuing summons/arrest memo are not required to be cross-examined by assessee. Justices Bhargav D. Karia and Pranav Trivedi observed that the assessee wants to cross-examine the persons who belongs to the department who have either issued the summons or arrest memo. Such persons are not required to be cross-examined by the assessee. The assessee/petitioner a proprietor of M/s. KSEG India International was accused of availing the input...

Bombay High Court Directs GST Council To Develop Mechanism For Cross-State ITC Transfer In Mergers/Amalgamations

The Bombay High Court has directed the GST Council and GST Network to develop a mechanism for cross-state ITC transfer in Mergers/amalgamations. Justices Bharati Dangre and Nivedita P. Mehta permitted the IGST and CGST amount lying in the electronic credit ledger of the Transferor Company to be transferred to the Petitioner Company by physical mode for the time being, subject to the adjustments to be made in future. The petitioner/Umicore Autocat India Private Limited has raised a...

S. 161 CGST Act | Adjudicating Authority Can Dismiss GST Rectification Application Without Personal Hearing: Madras High Court

The Madras High Court stated that the GST authority can dismiss the rectification application without a personal hearing. The issue before the bench was whether the third proviso to Section 161 of the TNGST Act, 2017, requires complying with the principles of natural justice even for dismissing a rectification petition. Section 161 of the Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 talks about the rectification of errors apparent on the face of the record. The third proviso to Section 161...

Gujarat High Court Upholds Validity Of GST Advisory On Interest For Delayed Tax Payment

The Gujarat High Court has upheld the validity of the GST advisory on interest for delayed tax payment. Justices Bhargav D. Karia and Pranav Trivedi stated that the reference to Section 79 of the GST Act in the advisory is only to put the assessee on guard as to such outstanding liability as per the record of the Authority so that the assessee can either make the payment of such liability if agreed or may oppose the same when the notice in Form GST DRC-01D is received by the assessee...

NCLAT Rejects Odisha GST's ₹740 Crore Claim, Holding That Second Appeal U/S 42 IBC Is Not Maintainable: NCLAT Chennai

The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal, Chennai Bench, comprising Justice Sharad Kumar Sharma (Member – Judicial) and Jatindranath Swain (Member – Technical), has considered the issue of whether the GST department could file a second appeal u/s 42 of the IBC without rectifying defects in the first appeal. The bench observed that a second appeal u/s 42 of the IBC is not maintainable if the defects in the first appeal have not been rectified. Brief Background The corporate...

Penalty U/S 122(1A) GST Act Can Be Imposed Retrospectively Even If SCN Was Issued After Its Enactment: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court has made it clear that Section 122(1A) of the Goods and Services Tax Act 2017 can be imposed retrospectively, provided the show cause notice had been issued to the assessee when the provision was introduced.Section 122 contemplates penalties for certain offences under the GST Act, including fraudulent availment of input tax credit.Section 122(1A) was introduced by the Finance Act 2020 and came into effect on 1 January 2021. It prescribes that any person who retains the...