Allahabad High Court Orders Release Of GST Taxpayer Over Arrest Papers Lacking CBIC-DIN

The Allahabad High Court has recently directed the release of a GST taxpayer after holding that his arrest and detention were illegal because the grounds of arrest did not bear a CBIC-DIN and the arrest memo failed to disclose the place of arrest. Petitioner Ashish Tyagi was arrested in connection with proceedings under Section 132(1)(a), 132(1)(f) and 132(1)(i) of the CGST Act, 2017 in a case initiated by the Directorate General of GST Intelligence (DGGI), Ghaziabad. The case pertained to...

Allahabad High Court Says GSTN Portal Should Allow Online Filing Of Additional Replies To Show Cause Notices

The Allahabad High Court has recently observed that the GSTN portal should be refined to allow the filing of additional or supplementary replies online. It also directed that a copy of its order be communicated to GSTN for consideration and compliance. The court noted that notices, replies, and orders are otherwise exchanged through the portal. While dealing with the rejection of Tejashva Tractors And Motors' refund application, the bench of Justice Saumitra Dayal Singh and Justice Vivek Saran...

Closure Of Non-Fraud GST Proceedings Does Not Bar Fraud-Related Proceedings By Central Authorities: Delhi HC

The Delhi High Court has held that the closure of proceedings by State GST authorities under Section 73 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 does not, by itself, prevent Central GST authorities from proceeding under Section 74 of the Act, observing that the two provisions operate on "altogether different considerations."Section 73 applies to cases involving tax not paid, short paid, erroneously refunded, or input tax credit wrongly availed or utilised without allegations of fraud,...

Once GST Appellate Tribunal Is Functional, Parties Must Pursue Statutory Remedy: Madhya Pradesh High Court

The Madhya Pradesh High Court has held that once the Goods and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal (GSTAT) has been constituted and commenced functioning, parties should ordinarily pursue the statutory appellate remedy before the Tribunal rather than invoke the High Court's writ jurisdiction. A division bench of Justice Vivek Rusia and Justice Pradeep Mittal dismissed a writ petition filed by SNS Minerals Pvt. Ltd. challenging an appellate order that had set aside a GST refund of ₹84.26 lakh...

Polypropylene Leno Bags Are Plastic, Not Textile Products For GST Classification: Calcutta High Court

The Calcutta High Court has recently dismissed Mega Flex Plastics Limited's challenge to a GST ruling that treated its polypropylene leno bags as plastic products rather than textile products. A Division Bench of Justice Debangsu Basak and Justice Md. Shabbar Rashidi upheld the order of the Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling (AAAR) and a Single Judge's decision refusing to interfere with it. At the heart of the case was the classification of polypropylene leno bags made by weaving...

Kerala High Court Holds Section 16(5) Overrides Section 16(4), Bars ITC Denial For Delayed Returns

The Kerala High Court on 19 May held that authorities cannot deny Input Tax Credit (ITC) to a registered taxpayer merely on the ground of delayed filing of returns under Section 16(4) of the CGST Act, where the taxpayer satisfies the conditions prescribed under Section 16(5), a subsequent relaxation provision. Justice Ziyad Rahman A.A. allowed a writ petition filed by We Match and quashed the assessment order passed under Section 73 of the CGST Act, which had disallowed ITC claims for the...

Gauhati High Court Holds DRC-01 Cannot Replace Statutory Show Cause Notice Under GST Act

The Gauhati High Court on 13 May held that GST authorities under the Assam GST Act cannot initiate and conclude proceedings under Section 73 solely on the basis of a Summary Show Cause Notice in Form GST DRC-01, reiterating that issuance of a proper statutory show cause notice is a mandatory precondition for raising a tax demand. Justice Manish Choudhury allowed the petition filed by Riyan Enterprises and set aside the adjudication order passed under Section 73 of the Assam GST Act for alleged...

Punjab & Haryana High Court Rules PLC Not Separately Taxable, Sets Aside DLF Advance Ruling Orders

The Punjab and Haryana High Court on 13 May held that Preferential Location Charges (PLC) collected by developers for offering a preferred location within a housing project form part of the composite construction service and cannot attract separate taxation. A Division Bench of Justices Deepak Sibal and Lapita Banerji allowed a writ petition filed by DLF Limited and quashed the Advance Ruling Authority order dated 28 August 2020 and the Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling order dated 28...

BOT Concessionaire Liable To Pay GST On Toll Rights Received As Consideration: Rajasthan High Court

The Rajasthan High Court on 22 May held that toll collection rights granted under a Build-Operate-Transfer (BOT) concession agreement constitute consideration for taxable works contract services and are not exempt from GST merely because toll collection itself enjoys exemption. A Division Bench of Justices Arun Monga and Sandeep Shah dismissed a writ petition filed by CG Tollway Ltd challenging orders of the GST authorities that had demanded Rs. 16.36 GST, interest and penalty on services...

Himachal Pradesh HC Quashes GST Show Cause Notice, Says Department Bound By Unchallenged Advance Ruling

The High Court of Himachal Pradesh has quashed a GST show cause notice issued to Amit Engineers after finding that the notice was issued despite an earlier Advance Ruling that had attained finality between the parties. A bench of Justice Vivek Singh Thakur and Justice Ranjan Sharma observed: “in view of the finality attached to the Advance Ruling between the parties, the show cause notice dated 14.02.2025 (Annexure P-6) was without foundation. In view of the finality of the advance ruling...

Delhi High Court Protects IndiGo From Coercive Action In ₹458 Crore GST Dispute

The Delhi High Court on Friday protected InterGlobe Aviation, which operates India's largest airline IndiGo, from coercive action over a ₹458.26 crore goods and services tax (GST) demand linked to compensation received from a foreign engine supplier. A division bench of Justices Nitin Wasudeo Sambre and Ajay Digpaul issued notice to the GST department and granted interim protection to the airline after observing that, prima facie, the amount received by IndiGo appeared to be “compensation”, and...

Revenue Must Rebut Taxpayer's Claimed Date Of GST Order Communication With Cogent Evidence: Allahabad High Court

The Allahabad High Court has reiterated that where a taxpayer discloses the actual date of communication of an order under the Uttar Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, the burden shifts to the Revenue to rebut that assertion with cogent material. It further held that the appellate authority is bound to give an independent finding on the date of communication of the order. Referring to the decisions of the division bench of the Allahabad High Court in Bambino Agro Industries Limited v....