High Court
CGST | Dept Must First Proceed Against Supplier Before Issuing Show Cause To Recipient For ITC Mismatch: Kerala High Court
The Kerala High Court has held that the department cannot proceed against a recipient for ITC mismatch without first initiating proceedings against the supplier. Section 42(3) of the Central Goods and Services Tax (CGST) Act, 2017, deals with the communication of discrepancies in Input Tax Credit (ITC) claims between the recipient and the supplier. Justice Ziyad Rahman A.A. observed that no proceedings had been initiated against the suppliers before the issuance of notice under...
Pre-SCN Consultation Serves No Purpose In Large-Scale GST Fraud Cases Involving Complex Transactions: Delhi High Court
The Delhi High Court has observed that pre-SCN Consultative Notice prima facie serves no purpose in large-scale GST fraud cases involving multiple entities and a complex maze of transactions.Pre-SCN consultation was mandatory under Rule 142 (1A) of the Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017. It prescribed that a proper officer shall, before service of notice to the person chargeable with tax, communicate the details of any tax, interest and penalty as ascertained by the said officer.However, a 2022...
Delhi High Court Restores Trader's GST Registration After 3-Year Delay; Says Medical Issue, Dispute With CA Justified Relief
In a rare instance of relief, the Delhi High Court has directed the GST Department to restore the registration of a trader, cancelled over three years ago, citing the medical issues and dispute with the Chartered Accountant which prevented it from acting earlier.Section 107 of the GST Act prescribes a strict timeline of three months to prefer an appeal from an order of the GST Department, which is extendable by one more month.Thus, a maximum of four months exists for a trader to challenge orders...
Delhi High Court Pulls Up GST Authority For Issuing Personal Hearing Notice Saying Assessee's Attendance Not Needed
The Delhi High Court recently criticised the GST Authorities for issuing a “strange” personal hearing notice to an assessee, which said that the assessee need not attend the hearing as the notice is issued only for the purpose of uploading final order.“The personal hearing notice is also quite strange to say the least that no personal hearing was granted before the Commissioner Appeals but a hearing was fixed for uploading of the order. Such a practice is inexplicable and deserves to be...
Delhi High Court Allows Consolidated Appeal Against Single GST Demand Order Covering Multiple Financial Years
The Delhi High Court has allowed the filing of a consolidated appeal in a matter where a 'common and single' order was issued, although the demand pertained to multiple financial years. In an order dated November 18, 2025, the Division Bench comprising Justice Prathiba M. Singh and Justice Shail Jain allowed the Petitioner to take recourse to a single consolidated appeal against consolidated GST demands raised via one order while stating that whether Section 74 was correctly invoked...
IGST ITC Declared In GSTR-9 Can Be Set Off Against Tax Demand If Missed In Monthly GSTR-3B: Calcutta High Court
The Calcutta High Court has stated that IGST (Integrated Goods and Services Tax) ITC (Input Tax Credit) declared in GSTR-9 can be set off against tax demand if missed in the monthly GSTR-3B. Justice Om Narayan Rai bench observed that the appellate authority did not justify why the IGST ITC declared in GSTR-9 could not be set off against the tax demand. In this case, the assessee/petitioner failed to claim Input Tax Credit (ITC) in respect of IGST pertaining to the months of May...
GST Authorities Cannot Act Against Transporter Of Goods When Genuine E-Way Bill Present: Allahabad High Court
The Allahabad High Court has held that under GST Act, the department cannot proceed against an assessee for transport of goods, if a genuine e-way bill is present along with the consignment. Justice Piyush Agarwal held that this would be especially impermissible if the validity of the e-way bill was not disputed by the authorities. “Once the goods in question is duly accompanying by e-way bill, which clearly demonstrates the genuineness of the documents and during validity of the...
Designated Committee Must Adjust Pre-Deposits & Investigation Recoveries While Issuing Final Statement Under SVLDRS-3 Scheme: Bombay HC
The Bombay High Court has held that the Designated Committee under the Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019 (SVLDRS) is mandatorily required to verify and consider pre-deposits and amounts recovered during investigation under Form SVLDRS-3 (final statement issued by the Designated Committee showing the exact amount payable by the taxpayer under the Scheme) A Division Bench comprising Justice M.S. Sonak and Justice Advait M. Sethna, while hearing a writ petition filed...
Cancellation Of GST Registration Announces Economic Death Of Business Entity; Reasoned Order Needed: Allahabad High Court
The Allahabad High Court has observed that the cancellation of GST registration of a business entity leads to it economic death and it is sine qua non that a reasoned order is passed by the authority for cancelling the registration of an assesee. The bench of Justice Saumitra Dayal Singh and Justice Indrajeet Shukla observed: “We are equally mindful that the order of cancellation of registration causes deep adverse impact on the conduct of business of any registered individual. Neither ...
Tax Authorities Cannot Resurrect Repealed VAT Powers After GST Regime, Nor Retain Deposits Without Statutory Backing: Tripura High Court
The Tripura High Court has held that where show-cause notices imposing penalty under Section 77 of the Tripura Value Added Tax Act, 2004 (TVAT Act) were issued after delay of 9 years, long after the repeal of the TVAT Act after GST Regime, are arbitrary, illegal and vitiated by malafides. The Court further held that the State cannot retain the security deposit taken for VAT registration once the GST regime does not mandate a security deposit for transporters. A Division Bench comprising...
Delhi High Court Condones Company's Delay In Filing GST Appeal On Ground Of Director's Illness
The Delhi High Court recently condoned the delay made by a company in challenging the GST demand of over ₹75 lakhs, on grounds of illness of its Director.A division bench of Justices Prathiba M. Singh and Shail Jain, after considering the facts of the case and on the basis of the medical records, were of the view that the lapse was “bonafide”.As per Section 107 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act 2017, an appeal before the Appellate Authority has to be filed within three months from the...
GST Act | S.130 Cannot Be Invoked For Excess Stock Found During Survey; Action Must Proceed U/S 73/74: Allahabad High Court
The Allahabad High Court held that Section 130 of the Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 could not be invoked where excess stock was found at the time of survey While dealing with a case regarding a search conducted under the GST Act, where upon finding discrepancies, proceedings had been initiated against the petitioner under S. 130 of the Act, Justice Piyush Agarwal held “A specific provision has been contemplated that if the goods are not recorded in the books of account, then the...