High Courts
Rulings of the High Court of Madras, newest first.
85 rulings
Madras High Court
Where letters were issued to customers of respective petitioner directing diversion of amounts payable to petitioners towards alleged GST dues before any order-in-original determining liability was passed, such pre-assessment garnishee actions were invalid and unsustainable, with recovery only possible under section 79(1)(c) once liability was crystallized by order-in-original
Madras High Court
Where petitioner failed to furnish annual return in Form GSTR-9 by due date, statutory late fee under section 47 was attracted, as it applies to both belated filing and non-filing, making the imposition of late fee and penalty valid and argument that late fee is not leviable for non-filing, untenable. GST: Where taxpayer failed to furnish annual return in Form GSTR-9 and was levied both late fee and general penalty, since no separate penalty was prescribed for such non-filing, general penalty under section 125 was applicable in addition to late fee, so levy of both was justified and challenge by taxpayer was rejected
Madras High Court
Where assessment order was communicated solely by uploading on portal without other statutory modes and appellant, a small business, cited difficulty in accessing the portal, expectation to continuously monitor portal was unreasonable, thus, appellant was entitled to an extended opportunity to file appeal within fifteen days and have appeal decided on merits
Madras High Court
Where petitioner, a tobacco trader, only sprinkled jaggery water, shade dried and bulked raw tobacco without altering its essential character, such activity did not amount to manufacture and product remained unmanufactured tobacco classifiable under CETH 2401 20 90, not under 2403 99 10 or 2403 99 90; thus, higher cess was not applicable
Madras High Court
Where assessee faced ex parte assessment for alleged excess ITC based on mismatch between GSTR-3B and GSTR-2A, had paid differential ITC pre-order and attributed non-response to a lapse by a part-time accountant, equitable grounds required that assessee be given opportunity to present submissions with supporting documents, thus, impugned assessment order was to be set aside for fresh consideration with effective hearing