Case-law directory
Search and filter tax rulings from the Supreme Court, the High Courts, the GST Appellate Tribunal and the advance-ruling authorities.
457 rulings found
Rajasthan High Court
Where assessee remained unaware of GST demand order due to it being uploaded only on portal under Additional Notices and Orders and not served manually, and e-filing of appeal stood blocked as time-barred, delay in filing appeal was condoned considering circumstances were beyond assessee's control and Appellate Authority was required to adjudicate appeal on merits
Karnataka High Court
Where property acquired by compulsory acquisition for highway widening included land with attached structure and compensation was awarded, deduction of GST from compensation was unwarranted since such expropriation did not constitute a supply of goods or services under GST scheme and no statutory basis existed for GST levy, thus GST deduction was ultra vires and liable for refund
Allahabad High Court
Where Adjudicating Authority, after passing ex parte order without considering assessee's replies, issued a rectification order without notice and sustained demand, such rectification was impermissible since it was not for an error apparent but involved merit review, denial of hearing vitiated proceedings, thus only permissible course was recall of earlier order and fresh decision after hearing
Rajasthan High Court
Where demand was confirmed against assessee and order was uploaded on portal under additional notices and orders tab, and assessee approached instant court with delay of 124 days, having satisfied that delay was due to reasons beyond control of assessee, appellate authority was to be directed to entertain appeal if same was filed within 30 days
Calcutta High Court
Where SCN was uploaded only under Additional Notice and Orders on GST portal without separate intimation and assessee consequently could not respond within prescribed time, dismissal of appeal under section 107 solely on limitation without examining merits was held unsustainable and appellate order was quashed with direction to admit appeal and decide matter on merits after hearing
Andhra Pradesh High Court
Where a registered firm challenged a single composite assessment order covering multiple periods without separate orders for each period, such composite order was set aside on this ground alone, allowing respondents to initiate fresh proceedings for each period separately if so advised
Rajasthan High Court
Where order was uploaded only on GST portal without any manual service or personal hearing, and assessee became aware of recovery only after bank placed lien, limitation did not begin from portal upload without acknowledgement, so delay in filing appeal was condonable as reasons were beyond assessee's control, and Appellate Authority was to hear appeal on merits
Gujarat High Court
Where refund was rejected, rectification sought within statutory period was disposed by a reasoned order, and appeal was filed against both rejection and rectification, limitation for appeal must be computed from rectification order and not from earlier rejection, thus, appellate authority erred in treating appeal as time- barred based on original order and matter was liable for decision on merits
Gujarat High Court
Where GST demand proceedings were initiated and concluded in name of deceased sole proprietor after cancellation of registration post demise, with SCNs and orders issued on GSTN portal and premises without knowledge of legal heir housewife, all such notices and orders stood invalid and quashed, with liberty reserved to initiate proceedings against legal heir as per law
Delhi High Court
Where assessee challenged validity of SCN and order solely served by uploading on GST portal without proof of actual intimation or receipt and no reply was filed, portal-only service absent acknowledgement was not considered sufficient, thus order was to be set aside with opportunity to file reply to SCN
Calcutta High Court
Where a single composite show cause notice under section 74 read with section 122 covered multiple financial years and was followed by year-wise DRC-01 summaries and demand order, issuance of such composite notice was beyond jurisdiction under CGST Act, making entire proceedings including demand order and DRC-01 summaries void and same were to be quashed
Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court
Where construction company’s electronic credit ledger was blocked under Rule 86A by Additional Commissioner without recorded reasons or prior hearing, such action, though Rule 86A does not specify hearing, violated principles of natural justice due to serious civil consequences, and order was set aside as arbitrary and passed in breach of audi alteram partem
Karnataka High Court
Where petitioners running a firm for battery recycling faced allegations of fictitious suppliers, bogus ITC and supplier untraceability, since petitioners held valid GST registration, cancellation or closure of suppliers post-supply did not per se disentitle ITC absent proof of collusion, had cooperated and had no antecedents, custodial interrogation for compoundable offences with maximum five-year term was unwarranted; Anticipatory bail was to be granted subject to conditions
Delhi High Court
Where notice for cancellation of registration was only uploaded on portal without proof of receipt or acknowledgement, such mere portal upload did not constitute valid service of notice, and petitioner was entitled to apply for restoration of registration with such application to be considered on merits without being affected by limitation
Madras High Court
Where petitioner filed March 2019 return on 30.10.2019 and was denied ITC due to limitation, retrospective insertion of Section 16(5) by Act 15 of 2024, along with Notification 17/2024-CT and Circular 237/31/2024, extended ITC time limit for FYs 2017-18 to 2020-21 up to 30.11.2021, rendering limitation-based disallowance unsustainable
GSTAT New Delhi
Where homebuyer alleged profiteering on construction services for project with 36 units but only 5 flats were examinable due to free allotments and 5 percent scheme units, and DGAP found ITC ratio declined post-GST with no additional ITC benefit accruing, no price reduction obligation arose, reliance on CA-certified project-wise data was justified, and proceedings were to be closed GST: Where complaint alleged non-passing of transitional VAT credit benefit in construction services, but applicant's agreement was post-GST with VAT levied only on a nominal pre-GST advance, and ITC-to-purchase ratio fell after GST, no additional ITC benefit accrued and no profiteering attributable to respondent was established; DGAP's findings and circular-based benefit-passing confirmed
Uttarakhand High Court
Where department served show-cause notice solely by uploading it on GST portal after cancellation of assessee's registration, despite statute prescribing multiple valid modes of service and there was no obligation on a non-registered person to monitor portal, such portal-only service was invalid and failure to grant opportunity of personal hearing rendered adjudication order unsustainable and liable to be quashed
Madras High Court
Where SEZ unit exported information technology services on payment of IGST after utilising ITC distributed through ISD mechanism, it was held entitled to claim refund under zero-rated supply provisions as proviso restricting refund to supplier applied only to direct supplies to SEZ and petitioner qualified for zero-rated refund route
Rajasthan High Court
Where assessee filed statutory appeal after inordinate delay contending non- service of order as it was only uploaded on GST portal and became aware only upon bank account attachment, writ jurisdiction permitted condonation since delay arose from factors beyond control and denying appeal on merits would cause grave prejudice, so delay in filing was condoned and matter remitted for hearing subject to pre-deposit conditions
Allahabad High Court
Where GST demand and penalty proceedings for alleged fake ITC based on MIS Portal and e-way bill analysis were initiated and prosecution regime was available under GST law, parallel prosecution and cognizance under BNS for same facts could not continue, so charge sheet and cognizance order in BNS proceedings were quashed in view of primacy of special statute