Kerala High Court
For assessee
Case-law directory
Every ruling, in plain sight.
Search and filter tax rulings from the Supreme Court, the High Courts, the GST Appellate Tribunal and the advance-ruling authorities.
Case-law directory
Search and filter tax rulings from the Supreme Court, the High Courts, the GST Appellate Tribunal and the advance-ruling authorities.
391 rulings found
Kerala High Court
Where gold jewelry trader omitted certain stock-transfer transactions in returns for April to June 2017 and sought revision, rejection solely for want of statutory audit was unsustainable as where a request was made even before initiation of assessment or penalty proceeding, such request was to be accepted GST: Where assessee effected inter-state stock transfers of gold jewelry during April to June 2017 and faced GST demand due to alleged absence of proof of goods' re- entry into Kerala, since revision of KVAT returns for that period was permitted, consequential GST demand orders were to be set aside, leaving further proceedings to depend on results of revised returns
Orissa High Court
Where assessee's appeal faced statutory pre-deposit difficulties due to misclassification of interest as tax in DRC-07 and rectification was time-barred, remanding case to Appellate Authority for fresh hearing was necessary since relegating assessee to GSTAT appeal would not serve justice and disputed matters on ITC reversal, interest and penalty required reconsideration on merits
Kerala High Court
Where petitioner filed return for March 2020 on 17.11.2020 and challenged denial of input tax credit on ground of limitation, since Section 16(5) allowed entitlement where return was submitted before 30.11.2021, rejection of input tax credit as time-barred under Section 16(4) was unsustainable and reconsideration was warranted if otherwise eligible
Madras High Court
Where petitioner’s refund claims for were rejected due to portal glitches and lack of manual redressal, refund statutorily recognized could not be denied on such technical grounds, and respondent was required to accept physical documents, process claims manually, and issue refund orders in accordance with statutory entitlements
Madras High Court
Where assessee manufacturing combed cotton yarn used certain inputs taxable at higher rates than output and claimed refund of accumulated ITC under inverted duty structure, rejection of refund on ground that principal input matched output rate was improper since statute allows refund if any input attracts higher GST, circular restricting such refund was unconstitutional and refund with interest was directed
Punjab & Haryana High Court
Where petitioner was penalized for GST offences without issuance of prior show cause notice and was denied reasonable opportunity of being heard, non- compliance with statutory mandate of natural justice under penalty provisions vitiated penalty, rendering impugned penalty unsustainable in law
Madras High Court
Where petitioner’s application for fresh registration was rejected solely for non- filing of returns up to cancellation date after statutory due date for doing so had expired and no extension notification was issued, petitioner could not be compelled to do an impossible act, making rejection unsustainable and authorities were directed to reconsider subject to fulfillment of remaining registration conditions
Karnataka High Court
Where pan masala manufacturers using pouch machines were subjected to a monthly machine-wise cess based on maximum rated capacity under a single slab up to 500 pouches per minute, and abatement was restricted to stoppages exceeding fifteen days, such levy disregarded actual production, ignored genuine shorter shutdowns, created arbitrary classifications and was declared unconstitutional being violative of Article 14. GST: Where pan masala manufacturers challenged legislative competence of Health Security se National Security Cess Act, 2025 for levying cess on machines/processes, since taxable event was possession or operation of machines and not supply of goods or services, Parliament had power under Article 246(1) and Entry 97 List I to impose such cess, but manner of execution violated Article 14, rendering Act and Rules void
Punjab & Haryana High Court
Where petitioner's GST registration was cancelled retrospectively however same was not proposed in show- cause notice, such retrospective cancellation violated natural justice and following settled law, such cancellation was to be quashed with liberty to respondents to proceed afresh as per law
Rajasthan High Court
Where a college paid affiliation fee to University and GST was demanded on such fee, in view of fact that issue was already settled holding that GST cannot be imposed on affiliation fee, GST demand was to be set aside
Rajasthan High Court
Where assessee's appeal against Order-in-Original was time-barred solely because order was wrongly uploaded on GST portal under incorrect category, preventing timely knowledge and filing, and delay was not due to assessee's fault, denial of hearing would cause grave prejudice, hence delay was condoned and Appellate Authority was to entertain appeal and decide on merits
Kerala High Court
Where assessee filed online refund application within limitation period and acknowledgment was given, treating later manual filing date as relevant for limitation under Rule 97A was arbitrary, and refund claim had to be considered with reference to acknowledged online application date, thus rejection of refund as time-barred was unsustainable
Kerala High Court
Where exporter of educational consultancy services filed refund applications for CGST and SGST paid under reverse charge, refund applications could not be rejected at scrutiny stage under Rule 90(2) for wrong portal category selection, non- applicable statements, or insistence on e-BRC/FIRC where Remittance Advice established remittance; limitation and document acceptability required merits adjudication, and deficiency memos were unsustainable
Kerala High Court
Where petitioner filed returns for October 2019 to March 2020 before 30.11.2021 and was denied input tax credit solely on ground of breach of Section 16(4), such denial was unsustainable as Section 16(5) permitted entitlement when returns were timely filed, thus petitioner was entitled to input tax credit for those months
Allahabad High Court
Where adjudication order demanding tax, interest and penalty exceeded quantum proposed in SCN and introduced grounds beyond notice, action was contrary to statutory mandate that final demand cannot exceed notice amount or rest on grounds beyond notice, thus, impugned order raising higher demand was unsustainable
Punjab & Haryana High Court
Where registered person's GST registration was cancelled with retrospective effect from 1 May 2023 though SCN did not propose such retrospective cancellation, such order was not sustainable and had to be quashed in view of relevant precedents, with liberty to authorities to issue fresh SCN and proceed as per law
Kerala High Court
Where assessees faced tax determination proceedings on the basis of unsigned notices and orders, quashment of those orders barred authorities from curing defects by re-uploading the same orders and required issuance of fresh notices or orders as per law, with earlier directions enabling such re-issuance or barring limitation set aside and liberty to issue new notices/orders expressly retained
Rajasthan High Court
Where petitioner-college paid affiliation fees to university and demand for GST on such fees was raised, grant of affiliation being a statutory and regulatory function did not constitute supply, affiliation fees were not consideration for taxable activity and were exempt under Entry 66 of Notification 12/2017-CT (Rate), thus GST demand was unsustainable and refund was directed if collected
Calcutta High Court
Statutory appellate powers which permitted only confirmation, modification or annulment, where Appellate Authority, while dealing with ex parte order confirming tax, interest and penalty for alleged short- payment on outward supplies and availing excess ITC, directed parties to appear before Adjudicating Authority for further proceeding, such remand exceeded statutory appellate powers and Appellate Authority should decide issue within statutory limits. GST: Where despite express statutory prohibition, Appellate Authority remanded matter to Adjudicating Authority for allowing admissible ITC while rectification was rejected as time-barred without addressing jurisdictional defect, both orders were to be set aside; writ remedy was maintainable despite existence of alternative appellate remedy
Karnataka High Court
Failure to upload an adjudication order in regular portal tab, coupled with non- service of full order and subsequent delayed knowledge, justified writ interference despite limitation; dismissal of statutory appeal was set aside, delay condoned and appeal restored for adjudication on merits, assessee having made statutory pre- deposit. GST: Coercive garnishee recovery during pendency of a statutory appeal, despite requisite pre-deposit, was unjustified; in view of appellate restoration, garnishee order was quashed, while dismissal of appeal as time-barred was set aside and delay condoned, with appeal restored for decision on merits