Omission to sign the order cannot be covered under the safeguards of “any mistake, defect or omission” under Section 160 ibid. An unsigned order is no order in the eyes of law. Mere uploading of the unsigned order would not cure the defect related to validity of the order.
Where ITC is denied on purchases from cancelled dealers, the taxable person should seek cross-examination of witnesses or authors of relied upon documents as a matter of right and use such opportunity judiciously. Denial of the right to cross-examine can cause grave and serious prejudice.
CBIC clarification on taxability of corporate guarantee is stayed upon allegation that it forecloses discretion or judgment that may be exercised by the quasi-judicial authorities by clarifying provisions in the nature of adjudication.
Any aggrieved person (viz., taxable person) can appeal within 3 months from the date of communication of the decision / order [Ref: Section 107(1) of the CGST Act]. However, the time limit available for the GST Department to file an appeal is 6 months from the date of communication of the decision / order [Ref: […]
Penalty cannot be imposed under Section 129 of CGST Act if there is no intention to evade tax.
Imposing reverse charge mechanism to collect tax on some services cannot be challenged under Article 14. Also, ITC is available only if the statute permits and to the extent that it does. Denying ITC to service providers (who are not liable to pay tax on output services) is founded on a rational basis which has a clear nexus with the classification since such person has no liability against which ITC can be set off.
Appellant cannot shirk responsibility of generating fresh E Way Bill if consignment is delayed. But, the Supreme Court held that the order under Article 142 shall not be treated as precedent.
If a person has submitted to the jurisdiction of the authority, he cannot challenge the proceedings on the lack of jurisdiction of the said authority in further appellate proceedings. It is not a case that the state tax officer lacks inherent jurisdiction but it is a case where the jurisdiction has been exercised by the state tax officer in the absence of any objection or pointing out by the assessee that the case has been assigned to a central tax officer.
Sl. Nos. 22(c) and 66 in the Table under Notification No.12/2017-Central Tax (Rate) dated June 28, 2017 (as amended) exempts GST on certain services to and by educational institutions. While the initial exemption entries were simple, insertion of provisos to Sl.No.66 ibid led to some difficulty in understanding by people who were not conversant with […]
The Hon’ble High Court of Gujarat observed[1] that an exemption entry should be liberally construed in accordance with the object sought to be achieved. That is, whether such provision is intended to grant incentive for promoting education or has some other beneficial reason behind it. The exemption notification should be given a literal meaning. Recourse […]
Assessee is a manufacturer of ghee and other food products. It procured certain goods / services (like televisions, air-coolers, gold coins, trips to Dubai, etc.). Such goods / services were awarded to its customers (viz., retailers) based on target quantity and value of purchases made by them. Hence, there was no consideration for such activities […]
The Hon’ble High Court of Allahabad observed that there was no necessity under either the GST Act or the Rules to furnish evidence of attempt(s) to submit Form GST TRAN-1 or TRAN-2. Rather, this was done vide a Circular. Consequently, such action is arbitrary and unenforceable.
The Gauhati High Court observed existence of a conflict between Section 54(3) of CGST Act and Circular No.135/05/2020-GST. Consequently, it held that paragraph 3.2 of the aforesaid circular should be ignored. This ruling would be helpful especially for taxpayers who faced significant changes in tax rates during the first two years under the GST regime.
A writ petition can be entertained under exceptional circumstances like: (i) breach of fundamental rights; (ii) violation of principles of natural justice; (iii) excess of jurisdiction; and (iv) challenge to the vires of the statute or delegated legislation.
Even if it is obligatory (under law) for the employer to provide canteen facility to its employees, ITC cannot be availed citing the proviso under Section 17(5)(b)(iii). Provision of canteen facility by the employer to the employee is a “supply” within the meaning of CGST Act.
How can the cancellation proceedings be concluded if the registered person belatedly replies to the show-cause notice? What if the assessee altogether fails to reply to the show-cause notice? On purposive construction, it appears that if the registered person fails to reply within the stipulated time limit, the proper officer should conclude the cancellation proceedings within 30 days thereof.
If location of supplier of intermediary service is in India and location of recipient of such intermediary service is outside India, taxpayers find it hard to digest that such supply becomes taxable merely since the Place of Supply is in India.
If the claim of refund was erroneously consolidated under the head of SGST owing to technical glitch in the GSTN portal, petitioner cannot be expected to produce any proof. In case of refund of un-utilised ITC, the order of debit is specified under paragraph 37 of Circular No.125/44/2019-GST. Paragraph 38 thereto provides relief that for applications where such order is not adhered to, no adverse view may be taken by the tax authorities.
Section 83 of CGST Act permits provisional attachment of property belonging only to the taxable person. In instances where bank account (jointly held with third party) is attached, the aggrieved (third) party should duly file their objections under Rule 159(5) ibid and may seek judicial remedy if there is no response or belated response on the part of Revenue.
Background: The petitioner paid certain dues through web portal. However, due to failure of web portal system, receipt was not generated. Hence, it was forced to again pay the dues. It applied for refund of the dual payment. The statute (Section 19 of Lighthouse Act, 1927) provided that where Light Dues were paid more than […]
Whole-time directors were paid remuneration in the form of commission (based on percentage of profits). The Revenue demanded service tax on such variable pay. A whole-time director is one who is in full-time employment of the company, for which he is entitled to receive remuneration. Hence, it was held[1] by the Hon’ble CESTAT (Kolkata) that […]
The Revenue authorities instituted recovery proceedings and recovered the entire amount of demand within three months from the date of order of the first appellate authority (which had ruled in favour of the Revenue). It appears such recovery was on the strength of a subsisting provisional attachment. However, the assessee had the right to appeal […]
Any decision, order, summons, notice or other communication under the GST Act / Rules should mandatorily be served by any one of the following methods, according to Section 169 of the CGST Act, 2017: (A) Hand Delivery: It can be served by giving or tendering: either directly; or by a messenger (including a courier); Such […]
The appellant is a unit operating in the Special Economic Zone (SEZ). It is engaged in export of goods. It availed input tax credit (ITC) on inward supplies from entities in the Domestic Tariff Area (DTA). The SEZ unit applied for refund of un-utilised ITC. Such accumulation arose on account of export of goods. The […]
Taxpayers often mix up credit / debit notes with amendments to tax invoices under the GST regime. Hence, the object of this post is to understand the circumstances in which credit / debit notes can be issued and when amendments to tax invoices should be recorded in the GST returns. Credit notes with tax implications […]