Topic
The GST Act governs the levy, collection, and administration of goods and services tax in India, including assessment procedures, notice requirements, and taxpayer rights under the CGST Act.
The Gujarat High Court struck down the State Tax Officer’s assessment order after finding it rested on AI-generated citations that do not exist, declaring such references legally untenable. It ordered all tax officials to verify any AI-derived case law before reliance, impacting future GST adjudications.
Gauhati High Court quashed the prohibition order on a tax consultant’s office, ruling that sealing under Section 67(4) is invalid unless the premises are actually denied access. The decision safeguards GST-registered businesses from arbitrary closure by tax authorities.
MP High Court quashes GST demand orders where show cause notices were uploaded under 'Additional Notices' instead of 'View Notices and Orders', rendering them legally non-existent. The ruling reinforces that procedural fairness mandates proper service of notices, not mere portal uploads.
The Gauhati High Court has upheld the legality of issuing consolidated GST show cause notices spanning multiple financial years, as long as the statutory limitation period for each year’s tax liability remains intact. This ruling strengthens administrative efficiency for tax authorities while safeguarding taxpayer rights against time-barred demands, setting a critical precedent for GST compliance and audit practices across Northeast India.
Andhra Pradesh High Court rules that Input Tax Credit (ITC) claims for FY 2019-20 filed by 27.10.2020 remain valid under Section 16(5) of the GST Act, even if the extended deadline was 30.11.2021. The court quashed denial orders and recovery notices, reinforcing that taxpayers cannot be penalized for adhering to the original filing timeline.
Andhra Pradesh High Court holds that GST assessment orders uploaded only on the portal without direct SMS/email alerts violate principles of natural justice. The court set aside ex-parte orders and directed re-adjudication with proper service, emphasizing that digital uploads alone do not constitute valid notice under Section 169 of the GST Act. Taxpayers and authorities must ensure compliance with direct notification requirements to avoid legal challenges.
Allahabad HC quashes GST demand under Section 74, ruling that fraudulent intent is a prerequisite for invocation. The court held that ex-parte orders without proper hearing violate principles of natural justice, remanding the case for fresh adjudication.
Madras HC clarifies that GST registration cancellation requires evidence of fraudulent financial nexus, not merely shared premises. The ruling protects businesses from arbitrary cancellations where Input Tax Credit claims lack physical movement proof but no fraud is established.
The Andhra Pradesh High Court has struck down a single GST assessment order spanning four financial years, holding that each tax period requires a separate proceeding under Sections 73 and 74. This ruling protects businesses from coercive, bundled assessments and reinforces the statutory requirement for year-specific scrutiny, impacting all taxpayers subject to retrospective GST audits.
The Andhra Pradesh High Court has ruled that a GST assessment under Section 62 is void if the taxpayer files the pending GSTR-3B return before the assessment order is served, rendering any bank attachments or recovery actions unlawful. This protects compliant taxpayers from coercive enforcement when they cure defaults proactively, establishing a vital procedural safeguard against arbitrary tax recovery.
Bombay High Court holds that transfer of leasehold rights in industrial plots is transfer of immovable property, not a taxable service under GST Act, quashing demand notice.
Bombay High Court holds that accused's fundamental right to travel abroad cannot be curtailed merely due to alleged large-scale tax fraud without evidence of flight risk.
Bombay High Court rules that GST authorities must provide written opportunity of hearing before passing adverse orders under Section 75(4) of CGST Act, 2017.
Andhra Pradesh High Court holds that digital signatures and RFN numbers on GST orders satisfy legal requirements, dismissing petition on grounds of laches and lack of merit.
Madras High Court holds that GST officers must explore alternative service modes under Section 169 if notices via portal go unanswered, ensuring natural justice.