These judgements are uploaded by our esteemed readers. If you have a judgement on an important topic that you would like to share with others, please use this form to upload it
The Guwahati High Court has held that Central Goods and Services Act , 2017 . S. 132(1)(a) : Punishment for certain offences -Arrest - Bail – Arrest for alleged GST evasion – Mandatory compliance with procedure under BNSS, 2023 – Violation of Supreme Court guidelines in Arnesh Kumar and Satender Kumar Antil – Bail granted .[S. 69, 70, 132(5), BNSS, 2023, 35(1)(b)… Read More ...
The Guwahati High Court has held that Assam Goods and Services Act, 2017 S. 132(5) :Punishment for certain offences – Arrest - Bail – Cognizable -Non-bailable - Alleged wrongful availment of input tax credit – Offence non-cognizable and bailable – Custodial interrogation not required – Bail granted. [S. 132, BNSS 2023, S. 483, Art. 226] The assessee, proprietor of M/s BKS Enterprises,… Read More ...
The Bombay High Court (Goa Bench) has held that Central Goods and Service tax Act , 2017 . S. 73 : Demands and recovery – Determination of tax - Joint Development Agreement – Real estate developer - Time of supply of service - Time of supply under Joint development agreement is governed by Notification 04/2018, i.e., on conveyance/allotment, not agreement date,-Any deposit obtained without… Read More ...
The Rajasthan High Court has held that Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. S. 54 : Refund of tax-Input tax credit-Inverted duty structure- Notification No. 09/2022 dated 13-07-2022 applicable prospectively -Refund cannot be denied for period up to 18-07-2022-Circular restricting refund claims only if filed before 18-07-2022 held arbitrary and violative of Article 14-Refund application filed within limitation period of two… Read More ...
The P&H High Court has held that GST Act: Dept is carrying out abrupt arrests driven by some inexplicable urgency rather than necessity. However, it does not pursue the trial with the same urgency. The slow-paced trials is symptomatic of a systemic problem (i) The GST regime was implemented on 01.07.2017 and interestingly, since its commencement, only a solitary conviction has been… Read More ...
The Delhi High Court has held that An Advocate cannot be subjected to harassment by a search and seizure conducted at his office unless and until there is some material for the GST Department to show that the advocate himself is not merely representing his client but is also personally involved in the alleged illegality. For the said purpose, some prima facie… Read More ...
The Bombay High Court has held that 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… Read More ...
The Delhi High Court has held that The Department sends automated e-mails and SMSs whenever anything is uploaded on the portal. If the taxpayer is not diligent in checking the portal & no reply to the Show Cause Notice is filed, the department cannot be blamed (i) A perusal of the screenshot shows that the reminder notice was clearly visible on 09th… Read More ...
The Bombay High Court has held that 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. 05-06-2007. [S.… Read More ...
The Bombay High Court has held that 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] The petitioner’s cash credit account with ICICI Bank was provisionally attached under… Read More ...