#IGST

Bombay High Court stayed a Rs.24.41 crore IGST demand on Singapore Airlines, ruling that airline operators are not 'recipients' of Computerized Reservation System (CRS) services under the CGST Act. The court relied on precedent to hold that IGST liability cannot be imposed where the operator neither directly pays for nor receives the services.

CESTAT Kolkata ruled that the revenue cannot invoke extended limitation to reassess IGST classification if the importer self-assessed the duty and no suppression was alleged during import clearance. The ruling bars post-clearance demands unless fraud or misdeclaration is proven, protecting importers from retrospective duty adjustments.

CESTAT Mumbai holds that clarificatory CBIC circulars favoring taxpayers apply retrospectively, setting aside demand for differential IGST on poultry machinery parts.