CGST Act | Right To Cross-Examine Is Not An Unfettered Right At SCN Stage, Party Must Specify Reasons: Delhi High Court

While dealing with a case under the Central Goods & Services Tax Act 2017, the Delhi High Court has held that though cross-examination can be granted in certain proceedings if it is deemed appropriate, the right to cross-examine cannot be an unfettered right.A division bench of Justices Prathiba M. Singh and Rajneesh Kumar Gupta observed,“The rationale behind setting aside an order/judgment on the grounds of non-provision of the right to cross-examine is to safeguard the affected party from...

GST Demand Of Over ₹10 Crores Raised Without Considering Assessee's Stand: Delhi High Court Orders Fresh Adjudication

The Delhi High Court has asked the Adjudicating Authority under Central Goods and Service Tax Act 2017 to undertake fresh adjudication of the show cause notice issued to an assessee, raising demand of more than ₹10 crores.A division bench of Justices Prathiba M. Singh and Rajneesh Kumar Gupta did so after noting that such a “substantial” demand was made without even considering the assessee's reply.“Clearly, a substantial demand of more than Rs.10 crores has been raised without considering the...

Whether Roof-Mounted Air Conditioners For Trains Attract 18% GST Or 28% GST? Delhi High Court To Decide

The Delhi High Court will soon decide the GST rate applicable to roof-mounted air conditioners of specific designs manufactured for the railways.A division bench of Justices Prathiba M. Singh and Rajneesh Kumar Gupta are seized with a petition filed by railways and aerospace technology company StesaLIT Limited, challenging a Circular issued by the Union Finance Ministry in 2024, stipulating that above said AC units shall be classified under HSN 8415 and not HSN 8607.HSN code 8415 attracts GST...

S.107(6) Of CGST Act Does Not Grant Discretion To Court For Waiving Pre-Deposit At Time Of Filing Appeal: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court has made it clear that it has no discretion to allow a prayer seeking waiver of pre-deposit condition prescribed under Section 107(6) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 for preferring an appeal under the statute.In terms of Section 107(6), insofar as the admitted tax, interest or penalty is concerned, the entire amount would have to be deposited. In so far as the disputed amount is concerned, 10% of the tax would have to be deposited as a pre-deposit along with...

Send RPAD Reminders If No Reply Received After Repeated Uploading Of Notices In GST Portal: Madras High Court Tells Revenue

The Madras High Court stated that if the taxpayer is not at all participating in the proceedings, even after repeated uploading of notices and reminders in GST portal, the Department should have resorted to other mode of service, viz., Registered Post with Acknowledgement Due (RPAD), so that considerable time of officers, assessee and the Court could be saved. The court extensively referred to the provisions of the Information Technology Act and concluded, while service through portal...

Service Of Notices & Orders Through Common Portal Is A Valid Mode Of Service U/S 169 Of GST Act: Madras High Court

In a recent ruling, the Madras High Court held that service of notices and orders through Common portal is a valid mode of service in terms of Section 149 of the GST Act. The bench rejected the argument that the GST portal is not a “designated computer resource of the assessee” and hence as per Sec. 13 (2) (a) (ii) of the Information Technology Act, receipt occurs only when the communication is retrieved. “Service by making it available in the common portal is a valid mode of...

GST Authorities Can't Deny Refund Of Pre-Deposit On Grounds Of Limitation, Violates Article 265: Jharkhand High Court

The Jharkhand High Court has held in a recent judgement that rejecting a refund claim for a statutory pre-deposit which has been made under Section 107(6)(b) of the GST Act, on the ground that the claim was filed after the 2-year limitation under Section 54(1), is legally unsustainable. The Division Bench comprising Chief Justice M.S. Ramachandra Rao and Justice Deepak Roshan stated, “There is no dispute to the effect that once refund is by way of statutory exercise, the same cannot be retained...

Contractors Are Liable To Pay GST At Rate Prevalent On Day Of Receipt Of Tender, Not When Work Is Allotted: J&K High Court

The Jammu and Kashmir High Court held that the contractors were liable to pay GST at a rate prevalent on the last day for the submission of the tenders and not when the work was allocated as the same was clear from the Special Condition No.49 existing in the contract agreement. The petitioners had filed the review on the ground that as per section 13 of the CGST Act the liability to pay tax on services arise at the time of supply of the work and thus provision of the contract was...

Burden Of Court Increasing Over Violations Of Natural Justice: Allahabad HC Imposes 20K Cost On GST Official For Not Following Mandatory Provision

The Allahabad High Court has imposed a cost of Rs. 20,000 on Joint Commissioner SGST, Corporate Circle-1, Ghaziabad who had issued a show cause notice without specifying the date and time for personal hearing and had passed an order under Section 74 of the Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 creating a demand of more than Rs. 5 crore ignoring the specific request for personal hearing made by the assesee.Section 75(4) of the GST Act provides that when requested in writing, the assesee must be given...

Transitional Credit Under GST Not Allowable For Capital Goods Received After 1 July 2017: Patna HC Upholds Recovery Of Ineligible CENVAT Credit

The Patna High Court, while upholding the recovery of ₹8,62,566 as ineligible CENVAT credit, held that transitional credit under the GST regime cannot be availed for capital goods received after 1st July 2017. The Division Bench of the High Court comprising Justices Rajeev Ranjan Prasad and Ramesh Chand Malviya held, “The distinction in the matter of giving benefit of CENVAT credit on capital goods during the transitional period may be found in Section 140 of the CGST Act. While this provision...

Delay Of 17 Months In Filing Appeal Not Condonable U/S 107 Of CGST Act: Jharkhand High Court Dismisses Plea Challenging Cancellation Of Registration

The Jharkhand High Court has held that an appeal filed beyond the statutory period of limitation, as prescribed under Section 107 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, is not maintainable and the delay cannot be condoned beyond the limits expressly stated in the statute. The Division Bench comprising Chief Justice M. S. Ramachandra Rao and Justice Deepak Roshan held, “Even otherwise, since specific period has been enshrined in the statute itself, the same cannot be condoned. Thus, we...

[S. 93 GST Act] No Provision Empowering Authorities To Make Tax Determination Against Dead Assesee: Allahabad High Court

The Allahabad High Court has held that Section 93 of the Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 does not empower the authorities to make determination of tax against a dead person and recover the same his legal representatives. Section 93 of Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 provides for liability to pay tax in case of death of the proprietor of the firm. Section 93(1)(a) provides that when the business is continued after the death of the proprietor, the legal representative shall be liable...