Delhi High Court GST Registration Can't be Cancelled Retrospectively For Non-Filing Of Returns: Delhi High Court Case Title: Aryan Timber Store Through Its Prop Virender Kumar Versus Sales Tax Officer The Delhi High Court has held that GST registration cannot be cancelled with retrospective effect for mere non-filing of returns. Madras High Court IGST Refund Claim May Be...
Delhi High Court
GST Registration Can't be Cancelled Retrospectively For Non-Filing Of Returns: Delhi High Court
Case Title: Aryan Timber Store Through Its Prop Virender Kumar Versus Sales Tax Officer
The Delhi High Court has held that GST registration cannot be cancelled with retrospective effect for mere non-filing of returns.
Madras High Court
IGST Refund Claim May Be Made Before Expiry Of 2 Years From Date Of Export Of Goods: Madras High Court
Case Title: M/s.Tulip Nilgiris Exports Pvt. Ltd. Versus Additional Commissioner of Central Taxes and Central Excise (Appeals)
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw
The Madras High Court has held that an IGST refund claim may be made before the expiry of two years from the relevant date. The relevant date is required to be computed from the date of export of the goods concerned by any mode.
Assessee Failed To Cure Defects As Documents Were In The Custody Of Central GST Authority: Madras High Court Quashes Assessment Order
Case Title: Sri Guberan Steels Versus The Assistant Commissioner (ST)
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 43
The Madras High Court has quashed the assessment order and held that the defect was not cured due to the availability of records in the custody of the central GST authority.
Allahabad High Court
Section 5 Of Limitation Act Does Not Apply To Section 107 Of CGST Act: Allahabad High Court
Case Title: M/S Garg Enterprises vs. State Of U.P. And 2 Others
Case Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (AB) 47
The Allahabad High Court has held that Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 does not apply to appeals filed under Section 107 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017.
UPGST | Opportunity Of Hearing Mandatory Under S75(4) Before Imposing Tax/Penalty: Allahabad High Court
Case Title: M/S Primeone Work Force Pvt. Ltd. Thru. Its Auth. Signatory Alok Kumar v. Union Of India Thru. Secy. Ministry Of Finance
Case Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (AB) 49
The Lucknow Bench of the Allahabad High Court held that before passing of any adverse order, such as imposing tax or penalty, opportunity of hearing is mandatory under Section 75(4) of the Uttar Pradesh Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017.
UPGST | Burden To Prove Intention To Evade Tax Lies Solely On Department: Allahabad High Court
Case Title: M/S Ashoka P.U. Foam (India) Pvt. Ltd. vs. State Of U.P. And 3 Others
Case Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (AB) 50
On Wednesday, the Allahabad High Court held that the burden to prove intention to evade tax lies solely on the Department. The Court held penalties in tax laws should not be imposed solely on insignificant technical errors which do not have any financial consequences.
Commercial Tax | Allahabad High Court Upholds Condonation Of 1365 Days Delay On Sufficient Cause
Case Title: M/S Royal Sanitations vs. Commissioner Of Commercial Tax Case Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (AB) 51
The Allahabad High Court has upheld condonation of delay of 1365 days by the Commercial Tax Tribunal in filing of appeal as it was sufficiently explained by the authorities.
Punjab and Haryana High Court
Extension Of Limitation Period Under Section 168A Of GST Act; Punjab And Haryana High Court Issues Notice
Case Title: M/s Garg Rice Mills & others Vs. State of Punjab & others
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has issued a notice to the government in a plea challenging the extension of the limitation period under Section 168A of the GST Act.
Himachal Pradesh High Court
Excise, Revenue And Other Departments Will Not Have Priority Over Secured Creditors: Himachal Pradesh High Court
Case Title: State Bank of India Versus State of H. P. & Ors.
The Himachal Pradesh High Court has held that departments of the state, including excise and revenue, will not have priority over the secured creditor s' debt.
Patna High Court
Patna High Court Imposes Fine Of Rs. 5,000 On GST Officer For 'Forcible And Illegal Recovery' Amid Non-Functional GST Tribunal
Case Title: National Insurance Co. Lt vs The State of Bihar and Ors
LL Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Pat) 14
In a recent ruling, the Patna High Court slapped a fine of Rs 5,000 on a Goods and Services Tax ( GST ) officer for forcible and illegal recovery of the full tax amount from a man waiting to avail the statutory remedy of appeal before GST tribunal which has not been made functional in Bihar.
Calcutta High Court
Payment To Third Party Instead Of Selling Dealer, ITC Not Allowable: Calcutta High Court
The Calcutta High Court has held that the writ petitioner is not entitled to the benefit of input tax credit as he has not paid the amount to the selling dealer but to a third party.
CESTAT
CESTAT Quashes Service Tax Demand Against HSBC Electronic Data Processing India On Back Office Support Services Exported To Its Group Entity
Case Title: HSBC Electronic Data Processing India Private Limited Versus Commissioner of Central Tax Rangareddy – GST
The Hyderabad Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has quashed the service tax demand against HSBC Electronic Data Processing India on back office support services exported to its group entity.