GST is known as the Goods and Services Tax which is an indirect tax which has replaced many indirect taxes in India such as the excise duty, VAT, services tax, etc. The Goods and Service Tax Act was passed in the Parliament on 29th March 2017 and came into effect on 1st July 2017.
The Goods and Services Tax (GST) is a value-added tax levied on most goods and services sold for domestic consumption. The GST is paid by consumers, but it is remitted to the government by the businesses selling the goods and services.
Breaking: Kerala High Court upholds VAT Assessments post-GST
The Kerala High Court has upheld the constitutional validity of the VAT assessments post-GST rollout. In Sheen Golden Jewels (India) Pvt. Ltd. vs. the State of Kerala, Justice Dama Seshadri Naidu was considering the Constitutional validity of Savings and Repeal Provisions of Kerala GST Act, 2017.The petition further stated that Section 174 is deprived of any power and therefore any penalty proceedings initiated under it is invalid. Based on these reasons, the petitioner submits that the Revenue cannot impose penalties for the AY 2010-11, 2011-12 in February 2018. The petitioners were represented by Senior Counsel N. Venkataraman, Advocate K.P. Abdul Azeez and Advocate Akhil Suresh.
Gujarat High Court strikes down Circular on Levy of GST On Distribution Companies
A two-judge bench of the Gujarat High Court has nullified the clause 4(i) of Circular dated 1.3.2018 issued by the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs (CBIC) which deals with the imposition of GST on Distribution Companies.The bench concluded that the services provided by the petitioner are in the nature of composite supply and therefore, in view of the provisions of clause (a) of section 8 of the CGST Act, the tax liability thereof has to be determined by treating such composite same as a supply of the principal supply of transmission and distribution of electricity. Consequently, if the principal supply of transmission and distribution of electricity is exempt from levy of service tax, the tax liability of the related services shall be determined accordingly.
GST: Kerala High Court temporarily stays TCS on Cars
In a major relief to the automobile industry in the State, the Kerala High Court has granted a temporary stay on the collection of tax at source under the Goods and Services Tax ( GST ).The GST provision has hit car dealers particularly hard as they collect 1% TCS from buyers purchasing cars worth over Rs 10 lakh. In such instances, a car dealer acts as a state agency as required by the specific Income Tax Act provision. This collection is one of the ways to monitor high-value transaction by the government since the buyer paying TCS can claim the credit of the same in annual Income Tax return filing.
Bombay High Court allows Parellel GST Proceedings in Two States
The Bombay High Court has allowed parallel Goods and Services Tax ( GST ) proceedings in two states. This petitioner has challenged an enquiry initiated by The Superintendent of CGST & Central Excise (AE) Mumbai. The petitoner contended that he is already being subjected to enquiry by CGST Authorities at Jaipur who have issued him a summons dated 7.9.2017. In the above view, it is his contention that two parallel proceedings / enquiries under the same subject are without jurisdiction. Thus, the enquiry by respondent No. 2 in Mumbai being later in point of time be quashed.
Service Tax Audit Post-GST Primafacie Permissible: Calcutta High Court
The Calcutta High Court has held that the service tax audit under Finance Act, 1994 after the GST rollout is permissible under law.“Prima facie, reading Sections 173 and 174 of the Act of 2017 it appears that an enquiry or an investigation or even a legal proceeding under the Act of 1994 is permissible notwithstanding the coming into effect of the Act of 2017. The authorities are proposing to undertake an audit for the period when the Act of 1994 was applicable. The authorities are entitled to do so,” the Court added.
Price Revision will not be allowed in Contract due to Change in Tax post – GST: Gujarat HC
The Gujarat High Court has ruled that, price revision will not be allowed in Contract due to the change in Goods and Services Tax (GST). Interestingly, the order was passed in March 2018, but reserved for publication till last week.“It cannot be said that either the State and/or the respondent No.2 have acted unfairly and/or unjustly and/or unreasonably and/or the decision of the State / respondent No.2 is contrary to the public good and/or the public interest. Under the circumstances, the aforesaid decisions shall not be applicable to the facts of the case on hand”, the Court added.
GST: Squad Officer can’t detain Goods for Bonafide Misclassification, says Madras HC
The Madras High Court has held that the Squad Officer cannot detain the goods and impose the penalty for a bonafide misclassification under the Goods and Services Tax ( GST ) regime.Citing the decision of the Kerala High Court, the Court observed that the process of detention of the goods cannot be resorted to when the dispute is bona fide, especially, concerning the exigibility of tax and, more particularly, the rate of tax.
GST Scam: Madras High Court rejects Plea for Anticipatory Bail
The Madras High Court has rejected anticipatory bail plea of alleged evaders of GST observing that the Central Goods and Services Tax Act was enacted with the laudable object of “one country one tax”.Wherever the department found that certain provisions of the Act were misused by creating fake invoices and input tax credit was being availed without any movement of goods, it had to be curbed and nipped in the bud to ensure that it did not grow into another mega scam, having a direct impact on the economy of the nation, the judge said.
GST Dept levies Rs 19 Lakhs as Penalty since Lorry runs 7 km in Wrong Path: Madras HC reduces Fine
The Goods and Services Tax ( GST ) department has levied a fine of Rs 18,96,000 on a lorry that deviated just seven kilometers from the right path on its way to Tamil Nadu from Pune.The officers informed the court that the lorry driver did not cooperate during interrogation which is why the lorry was seized. But the court found out that the GST officers spoke only English and Tamil whereas the lorry driver Badrinath Bhandari, hailing from Maharashtra, knew only Marathi and Hindi which is why he could not respond. The court also found that the lorry driver had lost his way. The goods were brought with proper documents and invoice and there was no attempt to evade tax.
Kerala High Court dismisses 3,250 Petitions challenging VAT Assessments post GST
The Kerala High Court had dismissed 3,250 petitions challenging the validity of the assessments under the earlier VAT regime after the GST rollout after September 16, 2017.The petition (WP-C No. 11335/2018) that was considered as the lead case in the judgment, was represented by Senior Counsel N. Venkataraman, Advocate K.P. Abdul Azeez and Advocate Akhil Suresh.
Gujarat High Court struck down GST Provision imposing Pre-Condition on Exports
A two-judge bench of the Gujarat High Court has invalidated a provision in the Central GST Act that restricts utilization of advance authorization licenses. These licenses entitle the holders to import goods duty-free for the purpose of exports. The decision would be a great relief to the exporters.As the petitions rose in courts, the government lifted the condition. Similar petitions are pending before the Punjab and Haryana high court, Madras high court, Odisha high court among others. However, the Centre lifted the conditions from the perspective effect or from January 10, 2019, onwards. The condition of pre-import was effective from October 13, 2017.
GST Appellate Tribunal Formation: Allahabad High Court seeks response from Govt
The Allahabad High Court, on Wednesday, asked the State Government about the steps taken by it for the formation of the GST Appellate Tribunal in the State.Counsel for the petitioner contended that despite clear-cut provision for setting up of the appellate tribunal, no GST Tribunal has been set up in the state so far. As a result, the assessees of GST are facing problems in the state
Petition in Bombay High Court challenging Constitution of GST Appellate Tribunal
A petition has been filed before the Bombay High Court challenging the provisions relating to the constitution of Appellate Tribunals under the GST Acts.The petition further pleaded to declare Sections 110(9) to (11) ultra vires the Constitution inasmuch the term of office of Judicial Members is restricted to 3 years, whereas the term of office of Technical Members is 5 years and in as much the term of office of the President is up to 70 years, while the term of office of the other Members is restricted to 65 years and consequently read down the same to allow all the Members of the Tribunal, that is the President, Judicial as well as Technical Members, to serve on the Tribunal for a period of 5 years or till the age of 70, whichever is earlier.
E-Way Bill contains Three GST Invoices: Kerala High Court releases Goods on furnishing Simple Bond. STOVE KRAFT PVT LIMITED vs ASSISTANT STATE TAX OFFICER 2019 TAXSCAN (HC) 104
In a case where the department detained the vehicle since dealer generated e-way bill showing three invoices, the Kerala High Court held that the goods can be released by furnishing simple bond.“There may be a practical difficulty for the Department in tracking the invoices when multiple numbers of invoices mentioned in the e-way bill generated. Anyhow, I am of the view that goods and vehicle shall be released to the petitioner on executing a bond. Though the learned Government Pleader submits that the petitioner’s case will be considered by the respondent by tomorrow. Taking note of the nature of the issue, I am of the view that the goods along with vehicle shall be released to the petitioner on executing a simple bond,” the Court said.
Company Director’s Bank A/c can’t be attached for Recovery of GST: Gujarat High Court
The Gujarat High Court has held that the Goods and Service Tax ( GST ) Department cannot provisionally attach bank accounts of directors of the company for recovery of taxes and penalty where the company has failed to pay the taxes and penalty.“Under the circumstances, if at all, the provisions of section 83 of the CGST Act could have been invoked against the petitioner herein, however, under no circumstances, the same could have been invoked against the directors of the petitioner-company,” the bench said.
GST: Gujarat High Court grants Interim Relief since Notice do not comply Requirements of S. 129
The Gujarat High Court has granted an interim order allowing release of the vehicle seized by the GST department under sections 129 and 130 of the CGST Act by noting that the notice issued prima facie do not comply the requirements of section 129 of the Act.The bench comprising Justices Harsha Devani and Bhargav D Karia noted that the show-cause notice dated 01.03.2019 has been issued under section 130 of the CGST Act calling upon the petitioner to show cause as to why the goods in question as well as the vehicle should not be confiscated for non-payment of an amount of Rs.60,72,639/, as detailed therein.
GST: Appellate Authority cannot condone Delay beyond 30 Days, says Allahabad HC
In a significant ruling under GST, the Allahabad High Court has held that the appellate authority is not empowered to condone delay beyond 30 days. The first appeal filed by the petitioner against the order dated 03.12.2018 was beyond the period for which delay may have been condoned, by about nine days.After granting time to the department, the Court granted stay to the petitioner with a condition to deposit 50% of the disputed amount of tax and furnishing security for the balance amount of disputed tax in the shape of other than cash and bank guarantee within a period of one month.
GST: Gujarat High Court grants Interim Relief since Notice do not comply Requirements of S. 129
The Gujarat High Court has granted an interim order allowing release of the vehicle seized by the GST department under sections 129 and 130 of the CGST Act by noting that the notice issued prima facie do not comply the requirements of section 129 of the Act.While passing an interim order, the bench held that “On a query by the Court, the learned Assistant Government Pleader is not in a position to point out that the procedure, as contemplated under subsections (3) and (4) of section 129 of the CGST Act, has been followed. Thus, prima facie, it appears that the show-cause notice under section 130 of the CGST Act has been issued without complying with the requirements of section 129 of the CGST Act. It is also an In the aforesaid premises, in the opinion of this Court, the petitioner has made out a strong prima facie case for the grant of interim relief. By way of interim relief, the respondents are hereby directed to forthwith release the goods in question and the Truck bearing registration no. detained / seized under purported exercise of powers under sections 129 and 130 of the CGST Act. However, the petitioner shall file an undertaking before this Court within a week from today to the effect that in case the petitioner, ultimately, does not succeed in the petition, he shall duly cooperate in the further proceedings.”
Jharkhand High Court refuses to stay Service Tax Audit post GST
Following the decisions of the High Courts of Calcutta and Gauhati, a two-judge bench of the Jharkhand High Court has refused to stay the proposal to initiate the service tax audit after the rollout of Goods and Services Tax ( GST ) regime.Refusing to grant an interim relief to the petitioners, the Court said that “In our prima facie view, the expression “instituted” in sub-clause(e) would imply the proceeding which stood already instituted at the time of repeal or omission of the 1994 Act. 10. In such circumstances, we choose to follow the course taken by the Hon’ble High Courts of Gujarat and Delhi and direct status quo to be maintained till the next date of hearing so far as the proceeding which form the subject matter of the present writ petition is concerned.”
GST Dept can’t detain Vehicle for Deficiency in Lorry Receipt: Gujarat HC grants Interim Relief
A two-judge bench of the Gujarat High Court has granted interim relief to a dealer where the Goods and Services Tax (GST) department had detained the goods for deficiency in the Lorry Receipt.“Stand over to 18th April, 2019. By way of further interim relief, the respondents are directed to forthwith release the truck No.GJ-04-AW 1999 along with the goods contained therein,” the bench said.
Dispose Pre-GST Cases Soon to Help Businesses: Allahabad HC to State Govt
A two-judge bench of the Allahabad High Court has directed the State Govt to dispose of all the pre-GST cases so that the businesses can plan their business properly.The case in hand shows that four tax regime has changed and presently country in under new G.S.T. Regime, the old pending cases should be decided at the earliest which will be in the interest of both the parties i.e. petitioner as well as the State and we, therefore, reject the contention of the respondent for relegating back the petitioner to approach the Commissioner in pursuance of notice issued under Section 4-A(3) of the Act,” the bench said.
Telangana HC upholds Arrest by GST Officials
The Telangana High Court has reportedly dismissed a petition seeking a direction to the Hyderabad GST Commissionerate officials not to arrest them and set aside summons issued.The GST regime is at its nascent stage. The law is yet to reach its second anniversary. “The complaints against the petitioners constitute a threat to the very implementation of law within a short duration of its inception,” the bench observed. To Read the full text of the Judgment CLICK HERE
A two-judge bench of the Hyderabad High Court has held that the interest under section 50 of the Central GST Act, 2017 is payable on the total tax liability including a portion of which is liable to be set-off against the input tax credit.Citing the proposed amendment providing the levy of interest only on the amount payable through the electronic cash ledger, the Court said that the recommendations of the GST Council are still on paper. “Therefore, we cannot interpret Section 50 in the light of the proposed amendment.”
Delhi HC directs GST Council to review Tax Structure for Solar Projects
In an Interim Order, the Delhi High Court has directed Goods and Services Tax Council ( GST Council) review the Tax Structure of Solar Projects. The Petition was filed by the Solar Power Developers Association (SPDA) that challenges the new tax formulation structure for solar projects.The Court also directed that, “Preparatory, to the above step the Petitioners will be called before the Central Board of Indirect Taxes & Customs through their authorized representatives for a consultative meeting within the next four weeks. If necessary, the concerned Ministry which is Ministry of Renewable Energy, Government of India will also be invited to the such consultative meeting and the deliberations of that meeting also be placed before the GST Council for its consideration”.
GST Tribunal: Delhi High Court bars Appointment of Members without Prior Approval
While granting an interim order in a writ petition filed by the Bharatiya Vitta Salahkar Samiti & Anr, the Delhi High Court has directed the Central Government to not proceed with the appointment of members to the Goods and Services Tax (GST) Appellate Tribunal without prior intimation, till the next date.Furthermore, since the qualification for becoming a technical member is lesser than the qualification required in the case of the first appellate authority, the Sections are in gross violative of the rule of law.
GST Tran-1 directory not mandatory, Centre-State seeks time to File Counter before Calcutta HC
Petitioner Rudra Autoparts Distributor filed writ petition before Calcutta High Court praying to allow filing of form GST Tran-1 to enable it to claim transitional credit of eligible duties in respect of inputs held in stock on the appointed day in terms of Section 140(3) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 read with Rule 117 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017.The petitioner is praying for declaration of the due date contemplated under the Rule 117 of the CGST Rules to claim the transitional credit as being procedural in nature and thus merely directory and not a mandatory provision.
No Stay on IGST Levy on Ocean Freights: Gujarat HC Order grants specific Relief to Petitioner Only
The interim stay order passed by the Gujarat High Court, in a petition filed by Ghanshyamlal and Company stayed the impugned demand where the petitioners challenged the vires of IGST related notification.Now, a similar petition is filed by Ghanshyamlal and Company where the Court decided to hear both the petitions together this year.
GST paid on Construction of Immovable Property intending to Let Out eligible for Input Tax Credit: Odisha HC. Safari Retreats Private Limited vs Chief Commissioner of Central Goods & Service tax 2020 TAXSCAN (HC) 258
The Odisha High Court, in a significant ruling, held that input tax credit is available in respect of GST paid while constructing the immovable property intending to let out for rent.“In that view, of the matter, in our considered opinion the provision of Section 17(5)(d) is to be read down and the narrow restriction as imposed, reading of the provision by the Department, is not required to be accepted, inasmuch as keeping in mind the language used in (1999) 2 SCC 361 (supra), the very purpose of the credit is to give benefit to the assessee. In that view of the matter, if the assessee is required to pay GST on the rental income arising out of the investment on which he has paid GST, it is required to have the input credit on the GST, which is required to pay under Section 17(5)(d) of the CGST Act.”
‘Blocked Credits’ under GST: Delhi High Court issues Notice to Centre, State
The Delhi High Court, on Monday issued a notice to the Centre and the State Governments while admitting a petition praying to resolve the issues relating to ‘blocked credits’ under the Goods & Services Tax (GST) regime, which is affecting hotels and malls.The petitioner prayed before the court to quash and declare both the provisions as violating the fundamental right of the petitioner and, therefore, violation of the right to equality before the law.
GST not Leviable on ‘Duty Free’ shops: Allahabad High Court
In a significant ruling, the division bench of the Allahabad High Court has held that, Goods and Services Tax ( GST ) not leviable on duty free shops. The petitioner Mr. Atin Krishna submitted that due to the misinterpretation of the provisions of CGST/SGST/IGST Acts, the public exchequer is being made to suffer huge financial loss and therefore, it is necessary in public interest that this Court provides true and correct interpretation of the applicable provisions of the aforesaid enactments so as to ensure that the revenue loss to the public exchequer is forthwith prevented.While dismissing the PIL, the Court observed that, “It is clear that the goods sold to passengers at the International departure terminal DFS are not cleared for home consumption nor for removal to another warehouse or otherwise provided in the Customs Act, 1962 and hence the goods are cleared without payment of duty only for export under Section 69 of the Customs Act under an invoice which is also deemed to be a shipping bill. Hence the sale/supply at the International departure terminals DFS would be export of goods under Customs Law and therefore will be considered as exports of goods under GST Act, since the definition of “export” and “export of goods” under both the laws is the same”.
GST Interest on Late Payers: Delhi High Court stays Proceedings
A two-judge bench of the Delhi High Court has stayed proceeding against M/s Landmark Lifestyle for late payment of interest on gross tax liability on Goods and Services Tax ( GST ). The bench comprising Justice S Muralidhar and Justice Asha Menon was hearing a petition by a Delhi based firm, Landmark Lifestyle.While granting an interim relief, the bench said that “Till the next date, no coercive action be taken against the Petitioner for non-payment of the interest amount. 5. List the matter before the Registrar on 5th August, 2019 for completion of pleadings.” The matter was posted to 30th September 2019.
The Delhi High Court will look into ambiguity in the existing Central Goods and Services Tax (GST) Law that whether input tax credit can be denied to a purchaser for the default committed by the seller.Section 16(2)(c) of CGST Act, 2017 provides for a condition wherein the recipient would only be entitled to Input Tax Credit if the tax charged in respect of such supply has been actually paid by the Supplier. The second proviso to Section 16(2)(d) provides that the recipient shall add an amount of Input Tax Credit availed, along with interest to the output tax liability if the recipient fails to pay the invoice amount to the supplier within 180 days. On Friday, the bench issued a notice to the centre asking response in the matter and posted the case on 18th September 2019.
Allahabad High Court upholds FIR filed against GST Evaders
The Allahabad High Court has recently upheld a First Information Report (FIR) against GST evaders under the Criminal Procedure Code.“Upon perusal of the impugned FIR, we find that prima facie, necessary ingredients of an offence of cheating, by submitting false information and documents, are clearly spelt out. Because, according to the allegations a bogus firm was got registered by showing false and bogus addresses of business; and, by taking advantage of such registration, inward e-way bills were generated to make purchase of goods worth Rs.35 odd crores and, thereafter, without generating outward supply bills, huge amount of money was deposited in cash in undisclosed bank account, suggesting that goods were sold without proper documentation, with a view to evade taxes. It cannot, therefore, be said that a bare reading of the impugned FIR does not disclose the commission of cognizable offences punishable under the Penal Code. Hence, the impugned FIR is not liable to be quashed.”
In an interim order, Jharkhand High Court has directed to maintain status quo on Service Tax Enquiry / Audit against the assessee post implementation of Goods and Services Tax ( GST ).The Court also observed that, “In our prima facie view, the expression “instituted” in sub-clause(e) would imply the proceeding which stood already instituted at the time of repeal or omission of the 1994 Act. In such circumstances, we choose to follow the course taken by the Hon’ble High Courts of Gujarat and Delhi and direct status quo to be maintained till the next date of hearing so far as the proceeding which form the subject matter of the present writ petition is concerned”.
While dismissing a Writ Petition against Dream11, a fantasy sports platform, the Bombay High Court has observed that It is undoubtedly a game of skill and not a game of chance.“It can be seen that success in Dream 11’s fantasy sports depends upon user’s exercise of skill based on superior knowledge, judgment and attention, and the result thereof is not dependent on the winning or losing of a particular team in the real world game on any particular day. It is undoubtedly a game of skill and not a game of chance. The attempt to reopen the issues decided by the Punjab and Haryana High Court in respect of the same online gaming activities, which are backed by a judgment of the three judges bench of the Apex Court in K. R. Lakshmanan that too, after dismissal of SLP by the Apex Court is wholly misconceived”, the bench also added.
The Karnataka High Court has granted Anticipatory bail against arrest under GST for alleged bogus billing / Trading.While allowing the bail application, Justice B.A Patil observed that, “Though several contentions have been raised with reference to initiation of the action under the GST Act and CST Act, since the scope of these petitions is limited only to consider the bail applications, the other points which have been raised are not dealt with in detail to dispose of these petitions. This Court while considering the similar aspect in Criminal Petition No.497/2019 c/w. Criminal Petition No.498/2019, disposed of on 18.2.2019 has discussed elaborately all the points and thereafter it has come to the conclusion that the accused-petitioners therein are entitled to be released on bail”.
Bombay HC allows dept to conduct Service Tax Audit post implementation of GST
The Bombay High Court has allowed the Service Tax Department to conduct Service Tax Audit on post Implementation of Goods and Services Tax ( GST ). The petition sought a declaration that Respondents do not have power under Rule 5A of the Service Tax Rules, 1994 read with Section 174(2)(e) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 to conduct audit for the period October 2013 to June 2017 i.e. prior to the introduction of CGST Act on 1st July, 2017.While allowing the Audit, the Court also observed that the issue of the saving of Rule 5A(2) of Service Tax Rules, 1992 on the introduction of CGST Act, 2017 is an issue that requires detailed consideration. This would be appropriately done at the final hearing. Thus, granting of interim relief at this stage would tantamount to granting final relief at the stage of admission. “Grant of interim relief at this stage would prevent the respondents from carrying out the audit as permitted under Rule 5A of Service Tax Rules, 1994 and Section 174(2)(e) of the CGST Act”, the Court also said.
Gujarat High Court orders Tax Dept to pay 9% Interest on Delayed IGST Refund. M/S SARAF NATURAL STONE vs UNION OF INDIA 2019 TAXSCAN (HC) 107
In a significant ruling, a two-judge bench of the Gujarat High Court has directed the GST department to pay 9% interest on the for the default of delayed refund of IGST.“In the overall view of the matter, we are inclined to hold the respondents liable to pay simple interest on the delayed payment at the rate of 9% per annum. The authority concerned shall look into the chart provided by the writ applicants, which is at Page 30, Annexure D to the writ application and calculate the aggregate amount of refund. On the aggregate amount of refund, the writ applicants are entitled to 9% per annum interest from the date of filing of the GSTR-03. The respondents shall undertake this exercise at the earliest and calculate the requisite amount towards the interest. Let this exercise be undertaken and completed within a period of two months from the date of receipt of the writ of this order. The requisite amount towards the interest shall be paid to the writ applicants within a period of two months from the date of receipt of the writ of this order.” Advocates Vinay Sharaff, Vishal J Dave and Nipun Sighvi appeared for the petitioners.
The Madras High Court has directed GST Department to enable the facility to Download ‘C’ form after the implementation of Goods and Services Tax (GST).While allowing the petition, the Court noted the case law ‘The Ramco Cements Ltd.,’ and said that, in the Ramco Cements matter, this Court allowed the writ petitions filed by the assessees and directed the Revenue to permit the petitioners assessees to download ‘C’ forms. It is not in dispute that though an intra Court appeal has been preferred against Ramco Cements matter with a delay of three days, the same remains unnumbered as of today. In other words, there is no dispute or disagreement that the instant writ petition falls clearly within the four corners of Ramco Cements case as well as the aforesaid order of another Hon’ble Single Judge made in W.P.No.12520 of 2019 (order dated 26.04.2019) in ‘Southern Cotspinners Coimbatore Private Limited’.
No Arrest on ground of Mere ‘Suspicion’: Gujarat High Court to GST Dept
In an assessee-friendly verdict, a two-judge bench of the Gujarat High Court has restricted the Goods and Services Tax (GST) authorities from arresting a city-based trader Vimal Goswami merely on suspicion of tax evasion.The petitioner also expressed apprehension that the authorities may arrest Goswami by invoking powers under section 69 of CGST Act. Once arrested, it would be difficult for the person to come out of jail for two months and he faces maximum punishment of five years, if convicted for tax evasion. But the department intends to do the procedure of determination of tax liability after arrest, which is against constitutional rights of a person and in violation of GST laws.
Andhra Pradesh HC orders revision in GSTR-3B Form
The Andhra Pradesh High Court has ordered revision in the Form GSTR-3B. GSTR-3B is a monthly self-declaration that has to be filed by a registered dealer from July 2017 till March 2018. Every person who has registered for GST must file the return GSTR-3B including nill returns.While allowing the petition the division bench comprising of Justice M.Seetharama Murti and Justice J. Uma Devi permitted the petitioner to rectify GSTR-3B statements for the sought period.
Composition of GSTAT is Unconstitutional, rules Madras High Court
The Madras High Court has ruled that the constitution of GST Appellate Tribunal ( GSTAT ) is unconstitutional. The division bench comprising of Justice S. Manikumar and Justice Subramonium Prasad has held that the number of judicial members must exceed the number of technical members.According to the petitioner, the provision is contrary to the decision of the Supreme Court in Union of India v R. Gandhi wherein it was categorically enunciated that Bench of National Company Law Tribunal / National Company Law Appellate Tribunal should consist of one Judicial Member and one Technical Member or the Judicial Member should be equal or in majority in compare to the Technical Member and in no circumstances the number of Technical Member should be in majority compared to Judicial Members.
GST not applicable on Duty-Free Shops for Sales to Outgoing Passengers: Bombay HC
The Bombay High Court has ruled that, Goods and Services Tax (GST) is not applicable on the Duty-Free Shop (DFS) at Mumbai International Airport for goods sold to outgoing passengers.“After the introduction of GST, the sales to arriving passengers continue to be sales in and/or from the customs area, as at the point of sale in DFS, the goods have neither crossed the customs frontier nor have they been cleared for home consumption by DFS. Accordingly, neither customs duty, nor Integrated Tax, is payable by DFS”, the Court also added.
GST Evasion: Rajasthan HC rejects Bail application in ITC Fraud Case
The Rajasthan High Court has rejected bail application in the Input Tax Credit ( ITC ) Fraud Case. The Petitioner has filed the application under Section 439 code of Criminal procedure,1973 seeking regular bail in criminal complaint pending before the court of Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, (Economic Offences) Jaipur Mahanagar, for offences under Section 132(1)(b)(c)(d),(f)(i) and (1) of Central Goods and Services Tax Act 2017 punishable under Section 132 (1)(i) and (iv) of Central Goods and Services Tax Act 2017 read with Section 132(5) of Central Goods and Services Tax Act 2017.While rejecting the bail application, a single judge bench of Justice Sabina said that, “Keeping in view the seriousness of allegations levelled against the petitioner, no ground of bail to her is made out”.
Gujarat High Court orders Inquiry against GST Officials
The Gujarat High Court has ordered an inquiry against Goods and Services Tax ( GST ) Department Officials illegally staying at the house of a taxable person without the authority of law.The Court also directed the Commissioner of State Tax, Ahmedabad shall carry out a proper inquiry in the matter and submit a report before this court on or before 13th November 2019.
The Madras High Court has allowed the Transitional Credit of Education Cess, Secondary and Higher Education Cess and Krishi Kalyan Cess into the Goods and Services Tax ( GST ).While quashing the Assessing Officer’s Order, the Court also observed that, “the revenue has not made out any bar for the transitioning of EC, SHEC and KKC into the GST regime and the petitioner satisfies all conditions both under sub-section (1) and (8) of section 140. The embargo placed by Rule 3(7)(b) is long gone with the introduction of GST. Certainly, the powers-that-be are conscious of these factors in drafting the new legislation and the specific provision in question i.e., Section 140”.
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has directed Goods and Services ( GST ) department to file or revise Tran-1 either electronically or manually.While concluding the Judgment, the Court also directed Respondents to permit the Petitioners to file or revise where already filed incorrect TRAN-1 either electronically or manually statutory Form(s) TRAN-1 on or before 30th November 2019. “The Respondents are at liberty to verify the genuineness of claim of Petitioners but nobody shall be denied to carry forward the legitimate claim of CENVAT / ITC on the ground of non-filing of TRAN-I by 27.12.2017”, the Court also added.
The Delhi High Court has directed Goods and Services Tax ( GST ) department to either open the online portal so as to enable the petitioner to file the Form TRAN-1 electronically or to accept the same manually on or before 20.11.2019.The division bench comprising of Justice Vipin Sanghi and Justice Sanjeev Narula has said that, “the factual position in the present case is not any different and thus, we allow the present petition and direct the respondents to either open the online portal so as to enable the petitioner to file the Form TRAN-1 electronically or to accept the same manually on or before 20.11.2019”.The Court also directed to process the petitioner’s claim in accordance with law once the GST Form TRAN–1 is filed.
GST: Gujarat High Court issues notices to Centre, State on limiting Input Tax Credit
The division bench of the Gujarat High Court has issued notices to Centre and the State Government on limiting the input tax credit to assessees in case the details have not been uploaded by the supplier.The amount of input tax credit in respect of the invoices/debit notes whose details have not been uploaded by the suppliers shall not exceed 20% of the eligible input tax credit available to the recipient in respect of invoices or debit notes the details of which have been uploaded by the suppliers under subsection (1) of section 37 as on the due date of filing of the returns in FORM GSTR-1 of the suppliers for the said tax period. The taxpayer may have to ascertain the same from his auto-populated FORM GSTR-2A as available on the due date of filing of FORM GSTR-1 under sub-section (1) of section 37.
The Delhi High Court has directed the Goods and Services Tax ( GST ) Council, the Central Government to consider the formulation of appropriate amendments in the Central Goods and Services Tax (CGST) Act.Further, it was directed by the High Court that GST Council, the Central Government and the State Government provide the status report. The next date of hearing in the case is 05.02.2020. The case was argued by Adv. Puneet Agrawal with Adv. Bharat Agarwal and Adv. Purvi Sinha.
The Delhi High Court has directed Goods and Services Tax Network (GSTN) CEO Prakash Kumar and its chairman Ajay Bhushan Pandey to monitor redressal of all grievances relating to GSTN Network.The Court also observed that, “In the meantime, till the constitution of PGCs, we direct that the Chairman and the CEO, GSTN shall be responsible to monitor, and they shall ensure the redressal of all grievances relating to the GSTN, including IT-related grievances in the working of the GSTN network, and to comply with our orders, as well as the aspects on which agreements have been reached and assurances have been given by the respondents. A status report shall be filed by the Chairman and the CEO, GSTN on the next date with regard to the grievances tickets raised; grievances/tickets addressed and resolved, and; outstanding grievances/tickets”.
The Gujarat High Court has ruled that, Input Tax Credit Can’t be denied on Expiry of Time Limit for Filing Revised Form GST Tran-1. By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner sought a grant of the input tax credit in terms of section 140 of Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017.While allowing the petition, The Court also directed the respondents that either open the online portal so as to enable the petitioner to again file the rectified FORM GST TRAN-1 electronically or accept the manually filed FORM GST TRAN-1 with corrections.
GST: Rajasthan HC denies Bail in Wrongful Availment of Input Tax Credit Case
The High Court of Rajasthan denied bail for the wrong availing of the input tax credit of more than Rs. 40.53 Crores involved in the supply of goods. The bail was denied by the single bench of Rajasthan High Court, consisting of Justice Abhay Chaturvedi in the case, Bharat Raj Punj v. Central Goods And Service Tax Commissionerate.The court dismissed the bail application pointing to“the gravity of the offence especially the fact that there are serious allegations against the petitioner of the wrong availing of input tax credit”. The court, however, did not express any opinions on the merits of the case.
In a recent case, the Gauhati High Court held that search and seizure made by the police officials without invoking the provisions of Section 67 of the Assam Goods and Services Tax Act (AGST Act) and following the procedure prescribed therein would be an aberration of the established procedure of law.In the event, no such appropriate decision is taken or the matter is proceeded under the appropriate provisions of law, it would stand declared that the detention and seizure of the 26 numbers of trucks of areca nuts belonging to the appellants would be illegal and unsustainable. It is again provided that in the event any of the three authorities proceeds against the appellants as per the respective laws indicated above, such proceedings shall be subjected to the logical outcome under the GST Acts, CrPC/IPC or the Customs Act, as the case may be.
Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscanpremium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates
