HIGH COURTSAndhra Pradesh HCAPVAT | Value Added Tax Not Leviable On Offshore Sales Beyond Territorial Waters: Andhra Pradesh High CourtCase Title: M/s Helix Energy Solutions Group Inc. v. The Commercial Tax OfficerCase Number: WRIT PETITION Nos.6319 & 6321 & 5089 of 2010The Andhra Pradesh High Court held that Value Added Tax (VAT) under the Andhra Pradesh Value Added Tax Act (AP...
HIGH COURTS
Andhra Pradesh HC
Case Title: M/s Helix Energy Solutions Group Inc. v. The Commercial Tax Officer
Case Number: WRIT PETITION Nos.6319 & 6321 & 5089 of 2010
The Andhra Pradesh High Court held that Value Added Tax (VAT) under the Andhra Pradesh Value Added Tax Act (AP VAT) cannot be levied on sales beyond 12 nautical miles, as such transactions fall outside the State's territorial jurisdiction.
Justices R. Raghunandan Rao and T.C.D. Sekhar stated that neither the State Legislature nor the Central Legislature would have the power to levy tax on the sale of goods made beyond the territorial waters of India.
Case Title: Ganpati Ispat v. Union of India
Case Number: WRIT PETITION NO: 31263/2025
The Andhra Pradesh High Court held that a notification merely defining or fixing the territorial jurisdiction of officers cannot be construed as conferring the power to initiate penalty proceedings under Section 122 of the CGST Act.
Justices R. Raghunandan Rao and T.C.D. Sekhar examined whether Notification No.2/2017-Central Tax dated 19.06.2017 conferred power on any authority or officer to initiate or conduct proceedings under Section 122 of the CGST Act.
Bombay HC
Case Title: United Spirits Ltd. v. Additional Commissioner of State Tax-II & Appellate Authority, South Goa & Ors.
Case No.: Writ Petition No. 229 of 2025
The Bombay High Court at Goa has dismissed a writ petition filed by United Spirits Ltd. challenging the levy of interest on delayed payment of VAT on sales of Extra Neutral Alcohol (ENA), Rectified Spirit (RS) and High Bouquet Spirit (HBS) for the financial year 2019–20.
A Division Bench of Justices Bharati Dangre and Ashish S. Chavan held that interest under Section 25(4) of the Goa Value Added Tax Act, 2005 is compensatory in nature and becomes automatically payable once tax is not deposited within the prescribed time, irrespective of any claimed ambiguity on taxability.
Calcutta HC
Case Title: Commissioner of Central Excise Bolpur Commissionerate v. M/s. Steel Authority of India Limited
Case Number: CEXA 31 OF 2024
The Calcutta High Court held that statutory interest under Section 11AB of the Central Excise Act is not leviable where the entire transaction is revenue-neutral and the duty paid is available as Cenvat Credit to downstream units, causing no loss to the exchequer.
Justices Rajarshi Bharadwaj and Uday Kumar stated that the Tribunal has recorded a clear finding that the situation is revenue-neutral, inasmuch as the duty paid by the assessee was available as Cenvat credit to its downstream units and there is no net loss of revenue to the exchequer.
Case Title: S.K.M. Timber Private Limited v. Superintendent of Central Tax, Burrabazar Division, Kolkata North CGST & CX Commissionerate and others
Case Number: WPA 11034 of 2025
The Calcutta High Court held that a GST registration cancellation order is unsustainable where the personal hearing is granted by one authority, but the final order is passed by another.
Justice Om Narayan Rai stated that, interestingly, while the notice for personal hearing was issued by the Assistant Commissioner, CGST & CX, Burrabazar Division, but the order impugned has been passed by the Superintendent. The order therefore defies the very well-settled principle that an order must be passed by the authority that hears the parties or that one who hears must decide.
Chhattisgarh HC
Case Title: M/s Eastman International v. Union of India & Ors
Case Number: WPT No. 228 of 2023
The Chhattisgarh High Court has held that exporters who do not carry out exports through Letters of Credit (LoCs) cannot be denied exemption from export duty on parboiled rice solely on the ground that they failed to satisfy an LoC-related condition in a temporary exemption notification.
A Division Bench of Chief Justice Ramesh Sinha and Justice Bibhu Datta Guru delivered the ruling while allowing the writ petition filed by a Ludhiana-based exporter engaged in the export of parboiled rice. The petitioner had challenged the levy and collection of 20 per cent export duty on its rice consignments during the brief period between 25 August 2023 and 15 October 2023.
Delhi HC
Case title: VDR Colors And Chemicals Pvt. Ltd v. Commissioner Of Delhi & Anr.
Case no.: W.P.(C) 14291/2025
The Delhi High Court has held that merely because the tax department is unable to place on record proof of dispatch of a personal hearing notice such as entries in a dispatch register, speed post receipts, or email records— it does not automatically follow that no opportunity of personal hearing was granted.
A division bench of Justices Prathiba M. Singh and Shail Jain refused to entertain a writ petition challenging GST orders passed in a case involving allegations of fraudulent availment of input tax credit (ITC).
Gauhati HC
Case Title: Sameer Malik v. The Union of India
Case Number: Bail Appln./3951/2025
The Gauhati High Court held that even though GST investigations are revenue in nature, arrests made by GST officers must strictly comply with the mandatory procedural safeguards prescribed under the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS).
Justice Pranjal Das opined that even with regard to arrest by revenue authorities under GST, the procedural compliance under Sections 35/47/48 B.N.S.S. are essential, failing which, the arrest may become bad in law.
Gujarat HC
Case title: THE COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS - KANDLA v/s M/A DEVAM IMPEX
Case no.: R/TAX APPEAL NO.507 of 2025
The Gujarat High Court upheld ruling of Customs Authority for Advance Rulings granting exemption from payment of Basic Customs Duty for inshell-walnuts imported by an entity treating the goods as "dietary fibre".
The respondent- assessee is a transferee of Duty-Free Import Authorisations issued against the export of Assorted Confectionary Products (SION E-1) and Biscuits (SION E-5).
GST| Tobacco In Small Retail Packs Classifiable As 'Chewing Tobacco': Gujarat High Court
Case Detail: Patel Products vs. Union of India & Ors.
The Gujarat High Court, in a bunch of matters concerning classification of Raw Tobacco Leaves packed and sold in retail pouches, were classifiable as 'Chewing Tobacco' irrespective of whether it was scented, fermented or liquored and re-packed or re-labelled.
In a recent judgment delivered by a Division Bench comprising Justice Bhargav D. Karia and Justice Pranav Trivedi, rejected the Tobacco Manufacturers stance that Tobacco without being fermented or liquored ceases to be a “Chewing Tobacco”. It was held that processes such as drying cleaning, sieving, sizing, cutting, and packaging into retail pouches would satisfy three important parameters (i) distinct name (ii) distinct character and (iii) distinct use, resulted in 'Manufacture' under GST.
Jammu & Kashmir And Ladakh HC
Case Title: Bharat Oil Traders v. Assistant Commissioner & anr.
Case Number: WP(C) No. 192/2023
The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh has held that the 2019 amendment to the GST law changing the limitation period for claiming refund of unutilised input tax credit cannot be applied retrospectively to deny refund claims relating to periods prior to 1 February 2019.
The Division Bench of Justice Sindhu Sharma and Justice Shahzad Azeem while deciding a writ petition filed by Bharat Oil Traders, a partnership firm engaged in the refilling and sale of edible oil and ghee.
Karnataka HC
Case Title: M/s Iprocess Clinical Marketing Pvt. Ltd. v. Asst. Commissioner of Commercial Taxes
Case Number: WRIT PETITION NO. 10989 OF 2025
The Karnataka High Court held that IGST (Integrated Goods and Services Tax) is not leviable on clinic observation studies for foreign recipients, as such services qualify as export of services with the recipient located outside India.
Justice S.R. Krishna Kumar stated that having regard to the specific observations made in the 37th GST Council Meeting, whereby it was resolved to clarify the tax liability in GST liability in relation to foreign recipients for R & D services provided by Indian pharmaceutical companies, the impugned notification dated 30.09.2019 is clearly retrospective, being clarificatory and elucidatory in nature.
No GST On Liquidated Damages For Breach Of Contract: Karnataka High Court Quashes SCN
Case Title: M/s Krazybee Services Pvt. Ltd. v. Additional Director, DGGI, BZU
Case Number: WRIT PETITION NO. 16471 OF 2024 (T-RES)
The Karnataka High Court held that liquidated damages recovered for breach or delay in contractual obligations are compensatory in nature and do not constitute consideration for any supply under GST.
Justice S.R. Krishna Kumar examined whether the amount paid as compensation by the Lending Service Provider (LSP) to the assessee constituted 'liquidated damages' and whether such amount was taxable under the provisions of the CGST Act.
Case Title: M/s Dodla Dairy Limited v. The Union of India
Case Number: WRIT PETITION NO. 21566 OF 2025 (T-RES)
The Karnataka High Court held that flavoured milk qualifies as a dairy product under Tariff Heading 0402 and not as a 'beverage' under Tariff Heading 2202. Consequently, GST at 5% will be applicable on flavoured milk instead of 12%.
Justice S.R. Krishna Kumar examined the classification of the flavoured milk under the GST, considering whether it falls under Tariff Heading 2202 (beverages containing milk) or under Tariff Heading 0402 (milk and cream, containing added sugar or sweetening matter).
Case Title: Sri Akram Pasha v. Senior Intelligence Officer
Case Number: CRIMINAL PETITION No.15066/2025
The Karnataka High Court held that custodial interrogation is not mandatory in GST offences punishable with imprisonment up to five years, even though such offences are economic in nature. The bench further stated that the prescribed punishment under the CGST (Central Goods and Services Tax) Act must be considered while determining the gravity of the offence.
Justice Shivashankar Amarannavar stated that one of the most prominent criminal sanctions imposed with regard to economic offences is that of arrest. It is widely acknowledged that arrests result in deprivation of liberty of a person. Thus, while it is imperative to maintain law and order in society, the power to arrest must also always be subject to necessary safeguards.
Case Title: M/s Excelpoint Systems (India) Pvt. Ltd. v. Joint Commissioner of Central Tax (Appeals-I)
Case Number: WRIT PETITION NO.25598 OF 2024
The Karnataka High Court held that marketing and technical support services provided by the assessee to its foreign parent qualify as export of services under the IGST Act (Integrated Goods and Services Tax) and do not constitute intermediary services.
Justice S.R. Krishna Kumar noted that the place of supply of these services is outside India, satisfying all conditions for export of services, and the assessee is eligible for a refund of IGST paid.
Orissa HC
Case Name: Auroglobal Comtrade Pvt. Ltd. vs. Joint Commissioner, Goods and Service Tax and Central Excise & Ors.
The Orissa High Court in a matter concerning, Double Jeopardy on Refund of about Rs. 14 crores where recovery proceedings were initiated under Section 73 for Refund already sanctioned by the Appellate Authority, has quashed the Show Cause Notice for recovery.
In a recent judgment, the Division Bench, comprising Chief Justice Harish Tandon and Justice Murahari Sri Raman, observed that by initiating recovery the Joint Commissioner sought to revive a Review Order differing with the findings of the Appellate Authority. It thus 'overstepped' its jurisdiction and so the Demand-cum-Show Cause Notice could not override a quasi-judicial decision of the Appellate Authority.
Case Title: M/s. Ayushi Galvano v. Commissioner (Audit), GST and Central Excise, Bhubaneswar Audit Commissionerate and others
Case Number: W.P.(C) No.30871 of 2025
The Orissa High Court has stayed further proceedings arising from a Goods and Services Tax (GST) demand-cum-show cause notice issued under Section 73 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, after finding a prima facie jurisdictional defect in the audit process that formed the basis of the demand.
The interim order was passed in a writ petition which challenged an audit notice and a consequential demand-cum-show cause. The demand was issued following an audit report communicated during audit proceedings conducted under Section 65 of the GST Act.
Patna HC
Case Title: Alok Pandey v. State of Bihar & Ors.
Case Number: Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case (CWJC) No. 15636 of 2025
The Patna High Court has relaxed an excessive penalty of 90% of Insurance Declared Value (IDV) to 10% on a motorcycle seized in a liquor-related offence.
A Division Bench comprising Justice Rajeev Ranjan Prasad and Justice Sourendra Pandey held that, considering the quantum of liquor (18 litres), applying Rule 12A of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Rules, 2021, which prescribes 10% of the insured value as the minimum penalty.
Punjab & Haryana HC
Case Title: M/s Garg Furnance Limited Vs. Union of India & Ors.
Case No.: CWP-31754-2025
The High Court of Punjab and Haryana has held that tax authorities cannot block a taxpayer's Electronic Credit Ledger (ECL) beyond the Input Tax Credit (ITC) actually available at the time of action, and that creating a negative ITC balance under Rule 86A of the CGST Rules, 2017 is without jurisdiction.
A Division Bench of Justice Lisa Gill and Justice Parmod Goyal was hearing a writ petition filed by M/s Garg Furnace Limited, which challenged the blocking of its ECL on 01.10.2025 resulting in a negative ITC balance, allegedly without notice and in violation of Rule 86A and principles of natural justice.
CESTAT
Case Name: Sun Pharmaceuticals Industries Limited
The Ahmedabad Bench of Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), in a matter involving similarity of Muscle Relaxant sold domestically vis-à-vis exported by a Pharma major and benefit concessional duty thereof, has remanded back to the Adjudicating Authority for fresh consideration.
Sun Pharmaceuticals Industries Limited, cleared/sold multiple products in Domestic Tariff Area (DTA) at concessional rate of duty in terms of Notification No. 23/2003-CE dated March 31,2003. As an Export Oriented Unit (EOU) can clear goods in DTA upto 50% of Free-On-Board (FOB) value of their physical exports i.e. a post-export entitlement.
Case Detail: Charotar Gas Sahkari Mandali Limited vs. Commissioner of CGST & Central Tax-Vadodara
Case No.: Service Tax Appeal No. 12621 of 2019- DB
The Ahmedabad Bench, Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has quashed the demand of service tax by treating payment of Rs. 60 lakhs to Vallabh Vidhyanagar Municipal Corporation as rent arrears and not consideration for tolerating/refraining from an act.
The Bench comprising, Dr. Ajaya Krishna Vishvesha (Judicial Member) and Mr. Satendra Vikram Singh (Technical Member) examined whether Rs. 60 lakhs paid to Municipal Administration of Vallabh Vidhyanagar i.e. Vallabh Vidhyanagar Nagar Palika was 'Consideration' towards tolerating an act or outstanding dues towards Rent. They clarified that once the recipient Nagar Palika had treated the amount as 'Rent' on which they also paid service tax, service tax could not be paid on the said amount again on reverse charge basis under the category of Declared Service.
Profit From Securitisation/Sell-Down Of Loan Receivables Not Taxable As Service: CESTAT Chennai
Case Title: Commissioner of GST and Central Excise v. M/s. Sundaram Finance Ltd.
Case Number: Service Tax Appeal No. 40272 of 2022
The Chennai Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) held that profit earned from securitisation or sell-down of loan receivables, including upfront fees and excess spread income, being in the nature of income arising from the sale of receivables, is not exigible to service tax.
Ajayan T.V. (Judicial Member) and Vasa Seshagiri Rao (Technical Member) opined that there is no element of service in respect of the incomes received in the form of upfront fee and Excess Spread Income on Sell down, which are essentially income generated through sale of future receivables, and service tax cannot be demanded on the same.
Case Title: M/s. Shree Ganesh Steel Rolling Mills Ltd. v. Commissioner of GST and Central Excise
Case Number: Excise Appeal No. 42240 of 2016
The Chennai Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) held that cutting and slitting of HR-CR coils does not amount to manufacture and therefore, payment of duty on such non-excisable activity cannot create a legal fiction to treat it as excisable. The bench further held that CENVAT (Central Value Added Tax) credit availed in respect of such activity is inadmissible, even if duty was paid.
P. Dinesha (Judicial Member) and Vasa Seshagiri Rao (Technical Member) stated that if there is no manufacturing activity, the question of availment of input credit does not arise. Here, no manufacturing activity existed at all during 2010–2015. Therefore, the HR/CR coils fail the very existential requirement of input under Rule 2(k). The Payment of duty on non-manufactured goods cannot legitimise the credit.
Case Title: M/s. RN Chidakashi Technologies Pvt. Ltd. v. The Commissioner of Customs, (Imports)
Case Number: Customs Appeal No. 40655 of 2023
The Chennai Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) held that the AI-powered MIKO-3 smart robot performs the essential function of Automatic Data Processing (ADP) Machines and cannot be classified as an electronic toy merely because it offers learning or entertainment features.
P. Dinesha (Judicial Member) and Vasa Seshagiri Rao (Technical Member) observed that the Revenue has not discharged its burden of disproving the classification declared by the Assessee, and also not established with evidence as to its attempt to re-classify the goods in question as “electronic toys” alone.
Case Title: M/s. Reckitt Benckiser (India) Private Ltd. v. Commissioner of GST and Central Excise
Case Number: Excise Appeal Nos. 40785 and 40786 of 2016
The Chennai Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) held that excess duty paid on PCMX (Para-Chloro-Meta-Xylenol) used for manufacturing Dettol products is refundable, as the prices of products were controlled by the Government. The bench opined that under such circumstances, the doctrine of unjust enrichment does not apply.
Vasa Seshagiri Rao (Technical Member) opined that when prices are controlled by the government, the manufacturers cannot charge any amount over the fixed price determined by the government. Consequently, any excess duty determined to be in excess consequent to finalisation of provisional assessment cannot be treated as having passed on the duty burden to another person, and the question of unjust enrichment does not arise.
Case Title: M/s. Sandor Medicaids Pvt. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Customs (Imports)
Case Number: Customs Appeal No. 87321 of 2024
The Mumbai Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) held that I-STAT blood gas cartridges are accessories used solely with the I-STAT analyser and cannot be classified independent diagnostic reagents. Consequently, the cartridges follow the classification of the analyser, the differential duty is not payable.
Dr. Suvendu Kumar Pati (Judicial Member) and R. Bhagya Devi (Technical Member) held that since the glucometer strips have the same function of the Cartridges that are used in the I STAT analyser, accordingly the products are rightly classifiable under CTH 9027.
Case Title: M/s Proffer IT Consultancy Private Limited v. Principal Commissioner of Customs, New Delhi (ACC Import)
Case Number: Customs Appeal No. 51783 of 2022
The New Delhi Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) held that handheld barcode scanners, whose principal function is scanning, do not become smartphones merely because they have ancillary mobile features. The bench further stated that these scanners are entitled to exemption from Basic Customs Duty.
Dr. Rachna Gupta (Judicial Member) and P.V. Subba Rao (Technical Member) stated that in the documents on record in the form of brochures, invoices, packing list etc., the imported goods are described as a Handheld Scanners. They are known as such to trade. Hence, there is no reason to hold that the product is smart phone merely because the product has an ancillary function of being used a smart phone.
Case Title: M/s Muchipara Consumers Co-Operative Stores Ltd. v. Commissioner of Customs (Appeals)
Case Number: Customs Appeal No. 51577 of 2025
The New Delhi Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) held that confiscated/seized cigarettes which do not comply with mandatory packaging, labelling and legal metrology requirements cannot be released for home consumption and therefore could not have been validly auctioned. Since the auction is vitiated, forfeiture of the security deposit is unsustainable.
Justice Dilip Gupta (President) and Hemambika R. Priya (Technical Member) stated that the auction notice may have required the assessee to perform certain acts but when the mandatory condition specified in the Rules and the Circular are not satisfied on the cigarettes packets that have been confiscated, the cigarette packets cannot be released in favour of the assessee and have to be destroyed.
Case Title: M/s Auto Stores (India) v. Commissioner of Customs, Nhava Sheva-I
Case Number: Customs Appeal No. 87893 of 2025
The Mumbai Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) held that merely because penetrating oil contains petroleum fractions exceeding 70%, it cannot be treated as adulterated diesel unless the revenue proves actual adulteration.
Dr. Suvendu Kumar Pati (Judicial Member) and M.M. Parthiban (Technical Member) stated that ……In the penetrating oil, the basic elements of which are more than 80% petroleum hydrocarbon and other additives, the presence of more than 70% hydrocarbon, including lighter hydrocarbons, as found in the test examination report, would not be considered as unusual.
Case Title: Mr Ali Akbar Ratansi v. Commissioner of CGST Mumbai West
Case Number: SERVICE TAX APPEAL NO. 85821 OF 2023
The Mumbai Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) held that a penalty under Section 78A of the Finance Act, 1994, cannot be imposed on a director unless it is established that the director was responsible for the company's business and was knowingly involved in the tax evasion.
C J Mathew (Technical Member) referred to Section 78A of the Finance Act, 1994 and noted that the prerequisites for imposition of penalty under Section 78A of the Finance Act, 1994 are that the director concerned was responsible to the company for the conduct of business of such company and was knowingly concerned with such contravention.
Case Title: Bridgestone India Pvt. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise & CGST
Case No.: Excise Appeal No. 51840 of 2024
The Principal Bench of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has set aside a central excise demand of ₹96.02 lakh raised against Bridgestone India Private Limited, holding that the extended period of limitation was wrongly invoked by the department.
A Bench of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal comprising Justice Dilip Gupta (President) and P.V. Subba Rao (Member–Technical) while hearing the appeal filed by Bridgestone India against an order of the Commissioner (Appeals), which had upheld the demand of excise duty along with interest and penalty for the period April 2017 to June 2017. The demand arose from an audit objection alleging that excess CENVAT credit was received through an Input Service Distributor (ISD) in violation of Rule 7 of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004.
Case Title: M/s Kasturi International Private Limited Vs. Commissioner of Customs, ICS (Import)
Case No.: Customs Appeal No. 51553 of 2022
The New Delhi Principal Bench of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has held that mere denial of a customs exemption due to wrong classification of goods does not, by itself, render the goods liable to confiscation under Section 111(o) of the Customs Act, 1962, unless the exemption was conditional and such condition stood breached.
The Tribunal clarified that where the Revenue's case is that the importer was not entitled to the exemption at all, and not that any condition attached to the exemption was violated, the statutory requirements of Section 111(o) are not attracted.
Case Title: M/s R.D. Clay Mines Pvt. Ltd. v. Commissioner (Appeals), CGST & Central Excise, Jodhpur
Case No.: Service Tax Appeal No. 55087 of 2023
The New Delhi Principal Bench of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has remanded a service tax demand raised on mining royalty paid to the State Government, holding that where the mining lease was executed prior to 1 April 2016, the applicability of service tax must be examined in light of the negative list regime under the Finance Act, 1994 .
The Bench, comprising Ms. Binu Tamta (Judicial Member) and Ms. Hemambika R. Priya (Technical Member), noted that the mining lease agreements were neither produced before the adjudicating authority nor before the Commissioner (Appeals). In the absence of the lease agreements on record, the Tribunal held that the issue could not be conclusively decided at this stage.
Authority For Advance Ruling
Apple Watch Bands Classified as Watch Straps, Not Smartwatch Parts: CAAR Mumbai
Case Detail: Apple India Private Limited
The Mumbai, Customs Authority for Advance Ruling (CAAR) in a ruling dated December 23 2025, has clarified that Apple Watch Bands (Leather and Non-Leather) could not be understood in its 'popular sense' as a part of Apple Watch.
Apple's Watch has a host of functionalities such as timekeeping, storage of data, voice messages, heart beat sharing, sketching via a paired IPhone. Apple's Watch gets covered under CTH 8517 6290 of the First Schedule of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975.
Tree Plantation & Maintenance In Non-Forest Areas By Charitable Trust Exempt From GST: Gujarat AAR
Case Name: Sadbhavna Seva Foundation , Sadbhavna Trust
The Gujarat Authority for Advance Ruling (AAR) has granted exemption to tree plantation and maintenance of them by a Trust in non-forest arears like unutilized barren lands, roadsides, amidst lane dividers, on private lands and every other available patch in its reach.
In a recent ruling Mr. Vishal Malani (Member- Central Tax) and Ms. Sushma Vora (Member- State Tax) has held that Entry No. 1 of Notification No. 12/2017 was applicable to tree plantation and maintenance by the Applicant as a charitable activity and was exempt from GST.
GST | ITC Not Available On Construction Of Warehouse Used For Storage Or Leasing: Gujarat AAR
Applicant's Name: PREMLATA RAKESH JAIN
Advance Ruling Number: GUJ/GAAR/R/2025/62
The Gujarat Authority for Advance Ruling (AAR) has held that input tax credit (ITC) is not admissible on goods and services used for construction of a warehouse or shed, even when such warehouse is used for providing taxable storage and warehousing services or is leased out for business purposes.
The ruling was delivered by the bench of CGST Member Vishal Malani and SGST Member Sushma Vora in the application of a registered GST assessee engaged in providing storage and warehousing services. The assessee proposed to construct a warehouse and sought clarity on eligibility of ITC on construction inputs such as cement, steel, beams, columns and related construction services.
OTHER DEVELOPMENTS
Kerala High Court Grants Bail To Accused Caught In ₹5,000 Land Tax Bribery Trap By Vigilance
Case Title: Jiby Mathew M v. State of Kerala
Case Number: BAIL APPL. NO. 14514 OF 2025
In an alleged bribe demand case of ₹5,000 for effecting mutation of property and payment of land tax, the Kerala High Court has granted bail to the accused after noting that the investigation was practically over and the petitioner had been in custody for more than 25 days.
The order was passed by Justice Muralee Krishna S. while allowing a bail application filed by the sole accused in Crime No. VC.22/2025 of the Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Bureau (VACB), Ernakulam.
Case Title: Ram Narayan Singh v. State of Bihar & Ors.
Case Number: Criminal Appeal (SJ) No. 468 of 2025
The Patna High Court has upheld the conviction of a Tax Assistant for demanding and accepting a bribe of ₹600 for processing an income tax refund, confirming the sentence imposed under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.
The single bench of Justice Alok Kumar Pandey noted that it is crystal clear that the place of occurrence is the Income Tax Office, Sasaram, where the complainant has alleged that demand was being made and on the point of demand, the occurrence is corroborated by P.W. 6 and P.W. 8 and the recovery was also admitted by other witnesses and all the prosecution-witnesses have supported and corroborated the core points of prosecution-story.
Centre Extends Anti-Dumping Duty On PET Resin Imports From China Till June 2026
The Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue has extended imposition of Anti-Dumping Duty on imports of “imports of “Polyethylene Terephthalate” (PET) resin having an intrinsic viscosity of 0.72 decilitres per gram or higher” from China PR till June 26, 2026.
The Anti-Dumping Duty Notification applies to PET resin having an intrinsic viscosity of 0.72 decilitres per gram or higher” falling under tariff items 3907 61 90 and 3907 69 90 of the First Schedule to the Customs Tariff Act.
Taxpayers To Be Barred From Filing GSTR-3B Return For Excess GST ITC Claims: GSTN Issues Advisory
The Goods and Services Tax Network (GSTN) has announced that taxpayers will soon be barred from filing Goods and Services Tax (GST) Return GSTR-3B if they attempt to claim or reclaim input tax credit (ITC) in excess of the balance available in the relevant electronic ledgers.
In the advisory issued on December 29, 2025, GSTN stated that negative balances and excess ITC availment will no longer be permitted in the Electronic Credit Reversal and Re-claimed Statement (ITC Reclaim Ledger) and the RCM Liability/ITC Statement. The system will enforce hard validations at the time of filing GSTR-3B, replacing the current warning-only mechanism.
Tamil Nadu Government Extends 100% Road Tax Exemption For Electric Vehicles Till 2027
The Tamil Nadu Government has extended 100% exemption on all Battery-Operated Vehicles both, Transport and Non-Transport (Electric Vehicles) from payment of Motor Vehicle Tax.
Electric vehicle adoption in Tamil Nadu has already reached 7.8% in 2025, the Minister of Industries said.
Customs Officers Must Wear Body Cameras During Baggage Clearance, Passenger Interactions: CBIC
Central Board of Indirect Taxes & Customs (CBIC) has mandated Body Worn Cameras for Customs officers posted at International Airports, engaging closely with passengers at baggage clearance counters.
To align with global practices, Customs had started to adopt the digital technologies for audio and video recording, to enhance transparency, accountability and professionalism concerning passenger facilitation and intervention. For speeding up passenger flow while maintaining security, dual channel was implemented at International Airports. The Red Channel is for restricted or prohibited goods.
The Ministry of Corporate Affairs, on 30th December, 2025, extended the deadline for filing Financial Statements and Annual Returns under the Companies Act, 2013, up to 31st January, 2026.
Initially, the due date for filing financial statements and annual returns for F.Y. 2024-25 was till 31st December, 2025.
The Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue has notified February 01, 2026, as the date for enforcement of the Health Security Se National Security Cess Act, 2025 levying a Health Security se National Security Cess on machines used in manufacture of pan masala and similar items.
The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) Court in Ahmedabad on December 29, 2025, convicted and sentenced an Inspector, Central Excise and Service Tax, Bhavnagar, to five years' rigorous imprisonment along with a fine of ₹63 lakh in a disproportionate assets case.
The court also sentenced his wife to one year's imprisonment with a fine of ₹50,000 for abetment of the offence.
Central Board of Indirect Taxes & Customs (CBIC) has notified upward revision of GST rate on tobacco and related products together with legislative changes to the GST Rules, enforceable from February 01 2026.
To phase out Compensation Cess on Pan Masala, Tobacco and Allied Products, CBIC has issued a Notification on Wednesday to prescribe a NIL rate of Compensation Cess on Tobacco Products, Pan Masala and related items from February 01 2026.
The Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue has notified 100% Duty-Free Exports under four major Free Trade Agreements with New Zealand, Switzerland, Norway and Iceland.
Indian exports would be partially exempt from various Rates like Basic Customs Duty and fully exempt from Agriculture Infrastructure and Development Cess as well as Health Cess.
The Directorate General of Foreign Trade (DGFT) has notified that Minimum Export Price (MEP) for Natural Honey will be USD 1,400 per metric ton and exports below this price would not be permitted.
In a Notification dated December 31, 2025, DGFT has notified extension by revising the Export Policy condition for Honey falling under tariff heading ITC HS 04090000 till March 31 2026, with immediate effect.
The Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs (CBIC) has issued informative flyers relating to 'Capacity Based Excise Duty' and Health Se National Security Cess (HSNS) payable by manufacturers of Pan Masala, Tobacco from February 01 2026.
With the introduction of the Health & National Security Cess and Additional Excise Duties on Pan Masala, Tobacco and Other Allied Products, the GST Compensation Cess will cease to exist.
CBIC Extends Anti-Dumping Duty On Flexible Slabstock Polyol Imports From Saudi Arabia And UAE
The Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs (CBIC) has extended the levy of anti-dumping duty on imports of Flexible Slabstock Polyol originating in or exported from Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates up to June 17, 2026, pending completion of sunset review proceedings.
The subject goods, namely “Flexible Slabstock Polyol of molecular weight 3000–4000,” fall under tariff sub-heading 3907 29 of the First Schedule to the Customs Tariff Act, 1975.