Category: GST Law

Archive for the ‘GST Law’ Category


Vilas Prabhakar Lad v. UIDAI & Ors. (Bom HC) [www.itatonline.org]

Goods and Service -Tax Act , 2017
S. 132: Punishment for certain offences -Fraud – Fraudulent misuse of Aadhaar and Permanent Account No ( PAN) – Identity theft – Strictures – Opened a bank account and obtained GST registration – Opened a bank account – Inaction by statutory authorities and law enforcement agencies – Directions for cancellation and redressal – Compensation denied – Liberty to file criminal complaint – Citizens of the Country who toils hard to make both ends meet cannot be made to run from pillar to post by leaving his livelihood to defend various proceedings arising of fraud by an individual impersonating the Petitioner’s identity – Cost of Rs 10000 each is imposed on respondents Nos 1, ( Unique Identification Authority of India ( UIDAI), 2 ( Chief Commissioner Gujarat Sate GST ) 5,( Chief Commissioner of Income Tax Mumbai , 6( Manager Union Bank of India ) and 7 ( Commissioner of State Tax Government of Gujarat . The Respondents Nos 1 and 6 are directed to pay Cost of Rs 25,000 each to the petitioner . [Aadhaar Act, 2016, S. 7, Income-tax Act. 1961 , 139A, 139AA, Goods and Service -Tax Act , 2017 ,132 Negotiable Instrument Act , 1881, S.138, Art. 226 ]

Darshan Singh Parmar v. UOI( Bom)( HC) www.itatonline.org

Maharashtra Goods and Service Tax , Act, 2017
S. 73; Demands and Recovery – Tax evasion- Reward for providing information related to tax evasions – Reward determined but not paid by the government –Reward scheme should be operated fairly and avoid frivolous objections – Government directed to pay the reward with interest in case of delay.- Circular GR No.STA-2004/CR-103 Taxation -2 dt -5-6 -2007 . [ S. 74 ]

Skytech Rolling Mill Pvt. Ltd. v Joint Commissioner of State Tax Nodal ( Bom)( HC) www.itatonline.org

Maharashtra Goods and Service Tax (MGST Act), 2017

S: 83: Provisional attachment to protect revenue in certain cases – Cash credit accounts – Not a property of the account holder – Cannot be attached provisionally u/s 83- Directed to withdraw the attachment within 24 hours . [S.83(1), Art. 226]

Supreme Construction & Developers Pvt. Ltd. v. State of Maharashtra & Anr. (Bom) (HC) www.itatonline.org

Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017

S. 73 : Determination of tax not paid or erroneously refunded or input tax credit wrongly availed or utilised for any reason other than fraud or any wilful -misstatement or suppression of facts – Demands and recovery – Mere claim of demand being without jurisdiction does not warrant waiver of statutory pre-deposit requirement for filing appeal against GST order- Review – Maintainability – Procedural Lapse – Absence of Proper Advocate’s Certificate – No new grounds for review – Review petition is dismissed with costs of Rs 10000. [S.107, Maharashtra Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, 226, Bombay High Court (O.S.) Rules, Art. 226]

20 Media Collective Pvt. Ltd.v Pr. ACIT (Bom) (HC)(UR)

S.148: Reassessment-Notice-Barred by limitation-Notice and order is quashed. [S.149(1)(b), Art. 226] Assessment year 2015-16-Barred by limitation (A.Y. 2015-16)

Saurashtra Gramin Bank. v. ACIT (2024) 208 ITD 55 /[2025] 121 ITR 417/ 233 TTJ 579 (Rajkot) (Trib.)

S. 37(1) : Business expenditure-Provisions for gratuity and leave encashment-Accounting Standard-15-Claimed only actual payment made to employees-Not to be reduced earlier year provisions from current profit and loss account.[S. 145]

Viswaat Chemicals Ltd. v.UOI (2024) 167 taxmann.com 450/91GSTL 114/106 GST 818 Bom)( HC) www.itatonline.org

Goods and Service Tax Act , 2017
S.73 :Determination of tax not paid or short paid or erroneously refunded or input tax credit wrongly availed or utilised by reason of fraud or any wilful -misstatement or suppression of facts – Challenge against show cause notice under the CGST – Writ against show cause notice is dismissed – Alternative remedy –No violation of principle of natural justice – Frivolous petition only to avoid recourse to statutory remedy and take its chance with filing petition in High Court – Cost of Rs 5 lakh is awarded on the petitioner to be paid to the Maharashtra Legal Services Authority within four weeks. . [ Maharashtra Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, Art . 226 ]

Nazmin Jamal. v. ITO (2023) 199 ITD 420 (Mum) (Trib.)

S. 69B : Amounts of investments not fully disclosed in books of account-Undisclosed investment-Failure to furnish statement and opportunity of cross examination-Addition is deleted. [S. 132(4)]

Dinesh Devraj Ranka v. Addl. CIT [2023] 200 ITD 731 (Bang)(Trib.)

S. 37(1): Business expenditure-Commercial expediency-Professional and consultancy charges-Matter remanded.

PCIT v. Backbone Projects Ltd. (2023) 457 ITR 50 /295 Taxman 54 (Guj.)(HC)

S. 153A : Assessment-Search-Industrial undertakings-Original assessment completed-No incriminating material was found-Disallowance of deduction under section 80IA is not valid. [S. 80IA(4), 132, 260A]