RATIO OF LATEST JUDGEMENTS ON GST
Nand Kishore Gupta Vs. the Additional Director General Directorate General of GST Intelligence {W.P.(C) 16900/2024 & CM APPL. 71602/2024} (Delhi High Court)
The Hon’ble High Court ordered the release of Rs. 23.50 lakhs seized by the DGGI, ruling that cash (Indian currency) does not qualify as “goods” under the GST Act. The court emphasized that cash falls under the definition of “money” under Section 2(75) of the GST Act, and is outside the scope of Section 2(52) related to goods. The Bench clarified that Section 67 of the GST Act, aimed at curbing tax evasion, does not authorize the seizure of cash or valuables. The court directed the department to return the seized amount, along with applicable interest, to the petitioner.
Dell International Services India Private Limited Vs Union of India (W.P.No.1924 of 2021) (Madras High Court)
The Hon’ble High Court directed the Revenue to refund Rs. 74.61 crores to the Petitioner. The court observed that Petitioner should not bear the burden of accumulated Input Tax Credit (ITC) due to the inverted duty structure, which prevented the company from utilizing the credit of the pre-GST regime. Petitioner had accumulated an ITC of Rs. 82.91 crores, but was able to transit Rs. 74.61 crores vide GSTR TRAN-1 which was enabled after 56 days (25.08.2017) from the date of implementation of GST law (01.07.2017). The petitioner had time upto 29.09.2017 to file TRAN-01 returns as per Rule 117 of the CGST Rules, 2017. Such time was extended upto 27.12.2017. The petitioner filed the Revised Return on same date (27.12.2017) belatedly, by which time, all the supplies effected by the petitioner had incurred a tax liability of Rs.3,06,54,81,564/-. The part of the liability was discharged by the petitioner from and out of ITC availed during the aforesaid period starting from 01.07.2017 to a sum of Rs.2,19,58,03,162/-. Thus, the balance of Rs.86,96,78,402/- was paid in cash. If the aforesaid ITC was seamlessly made available to the petitioner, the petitioner could have discharged the bulk of its tax liability of Rs.3,06,54,81,564/- of ITC availed and out of transitional ITC and would have been required to pay only the difference of Rs.4,05,58,690/- (Rs.86,96,78,402 – Rs.82,91,19,712) in cash, instead of Rs.86,96,78,402/-.
The court ruled that Dell could have discharged its tax liabilities using this ITC if the system had been timely activated. The department was instructed to allow amendments to Petitioner’s returns i.e. GSTR 3B and issue the refund as directed.
BLA Infrastructure Private Limited Vs State of Jharkhand {W.P.(T) No. 6527 of 2024} (Jharkhand High Court)
The Hon’ble High Court ruled that an assessee has a right to refund of statutory pre-deposit once an appeal is allowed in their favour, and this right cannot be denied due to limitation periods. The court observed that Article 137 of the Limitation Act allows a 3-year period for filing a Money Suit, and treating the word “may” in Section 54 of the GST Act as mandatory would unjustly bar an Assessee’s right to claim a refund. The court emphasized that retention of the pre-deposit by authorities contradicts the Constitution, which prohibits tax without authority of law. In this case, after an appeal was allowed, the petitioner applied for a refund of the pre-deposit, but it was initially rejected on the grounds of time limits.
The court ruled that such retention is unreasonable, arbitrary, and in conflict with the Limitation Act, as the word “may” in the GST Act is directory and not mandatory.
Radha Rani Metal Vs Principal Commissioner of Goods and Service Tax W.P.(C) 1180/2025
The Hon’ble High Court ruled that the cancellation of GST registration was invalid due to the absence of reasons in the original Show Cause Notice supporting the proposed retrospective cancellation. The court noted that failing to inform the petitioner of the intent/ reasons for a retrospective cancellation prior to issuing the SCN rendered the action unlawful. The court modified the order, stating that the cancellation would only be effective from the date of the SCN, not retrospectively.
Ramesh Wadhera Vs DGGI W.P.(C) 1115/2025 & CM APPL. 5550/2025 (Stay) Delhi High Court
The Hon’ble High Court declined to intervene in the Show Cause Notice (SCN) proceedings against an accused involved in availing fraudulent IGST refunds through fake firms as the adjudication was carried upon by the proper officer as well as due to the serious allegations levelled against the Petitioner.
ADVISORY FOR GST REGISTRATION PROCESS (RULE 8 OF CGST RULES, 2017)
Applicants must adhere to the following steps as per Rule 8 of the CGST Rules, 2017:
- Applicants Not Opting for Aadhaar Authentication:
If an applicant chosen not to authenticate via Aadhaar, then an applicant must visit the designated GST Suvidha Kendra (GSK) for photo capturing and document verification. Upon selecting “NO”, an email will be sent with GSK details and required documents. An applicant can schedule an appointment via a link in the email. An appointment confirmation will follow through mail.
- Applicants Opting for Aadhaar Authentication and application identified for Biometric Authentication:
Promoters/Partners opting for Aadhaar authentication should first visit the GSK for biometric authentication and photo capturing, followed by the Primary Authorized Signatory (PAS). The Primary Authorized Signatory (PAS) is required to carry the documents listed in the intimation email for verification at the GSK. Additionally, the PAS must undergo photo capturing and biometric authentication at the GSK as part of the process.
If a Promoter/Partner has already been biometric verified in any State/UT during a previous registration, they will not need to visit the GSK again. However, if she/he becomes the PAS of the entity, only document verification at the GSK will be required.
- Non-Generation of Application Reference Number (ARN):
For applicants opted Aadhaar-authentication and application identified for Biometric Authentication: If any of the Promoter/Partner or PAS fails to visit the GSK or biometric authentication fails or document verification is not completed within 15 days of submitting Part B of REG-01, the ARN will not be generated.
For non-Aadhaar applicants: If photo capturing or document verification is not completed within 15 days, the ARN will not be generated.
ADVISORY ON E-WAY BILL GENERATION FOR GOODS UNDER CHAPTER 71
Rule 138(14) of the Central Goods and Services Tax (CGST) Rules, 2017, read with its Annexure S.Nos. 4 and 5, states that goods covered under Chapter 71 viz., Natural or cultured pearls and precious or semi-precious stones; precious metals and metals clad with precious metal, Jewellery, goldsmiths’, and silversmiths’ articles, except those classified under HSN 7117(Imitation Jewellery), are exempt from the mandatory requirement of generating an E-Way Bill.
Pursuant to the introduction of the E-Way Bill (EWB) for goods classified under Chapter 71, excluding HSN 7117 (Imitation Jewellery), in the state of Kerala for intra-state movement, the National Informatics Centre (NIC) has provided an option to generate EWBs for goods covered under Chapter 71 except 7117 under the category “EWB for Gold” on the EWB portal.
It has been observed that various industry stakeholders have voluntarily been generating EWBs for goods under Chapter 71 due to the availability of this option in the EWB system. In this regard, it is clarified that while the system previously allowed EWB generation for goods under Chapter 71, this facility has now been withdrawn.
Accordingly, taxpayers and transporters engaged in the movement of goods under Chapter 71 (except HSN 7117) are advised that EWB generation is not required.
However, it may be noted that for the intrastate movement of such goods within the state of Kerala, the generation of an EWB has been mandated vide Notification No.10/24-State Tax dated 27/12/24 issued by the state of Kerala.
CIRCULARS ISSUED BY CBIC– Circular No. 24 7/04/2025-GST
- Pepper Classification and GST Rate
Pepper (green, white, or black) falls under HSN 0904 and attracts a 5% GST as per Schedule I of Notification No. 1/2017-Central Tax (Rate). Agriculturists supplying dried pepper are exempt from GST under Section 23(1) of the CGST Act and do not require registration.
- Raisins Supplied by Agriculturists
Agriculturists supplying raisins are not liable to GST registration and are exempt under Section 23(1) of the CGST Act, as per the GST Council’s recommendation.
- GST on Ready-to-Eat Popcorn
Ready-to-eat popcorn mixed with salt and spices is classified under HS 2106 90 99 and attracts 5% GST if unlabelled and 12% GST if pre-packaged and labelled. Popcorn mixed with sugar (e.g., caramel) is classified under HS 1704 90 90 and attracts 18% GST.
- GST on Fly Ash-based AAC Blocks
Autoclaved Aerated Concrete (AAC) blocks containing over 50% fly ash are classified under HS 6815 and attract a 12% GST, as clarified by the GST Council.
- Effective Date for Ground Clearance Amendment
The GST Council clarified that the amended entry 52B in Notification No. 1/2017-Compensation Cess (Rate) will apply apply on or after 26.7.2023 to utility vehicles with engine capacity over 1500cc, length exceeding 4000mm, and ground clearance of 170mm or more.
Instruction No. 02/2025-GST- Procedure to be followed in department appeal filed against interest and/or penalty only, related to Section 128A of the CGST Act, 2017 -regarding.
Section 128A of the Central Goods and Service Tax (CGST) Act, 2017, along with Rule 164 of the CGST Rules, provides a waiver of interest or penalty (or both) for demands related to the Financial Years 2017-18, 2018-19, and 2019-20, subject to certain conditions. Circular No. 238/32/2024-GST, dated 15th October 2024, clarified various aspects of this provision.
Field formations have inquired whether the benefits of Section 128A extend to taxpayers who have paid the tax but are facing appeals based on incorrect interest calculations or penalties that are under dispute. The Board has confirmed that if the tax is fully paid and only interest or penalty is in dispute, the taxpayer is eligible for the Section 128A benefit.
Furthermore, even if the department has filed an appeal or is in the process of doing so, taxpayers who meet the conditions of Section 128A should not be denied its benefits due to procedural issues. The goal of this provision is to reduce litigation.
Thus, if the tax is fully paid, and the appeal or review is solely regarding interest or penalty calculations, the proper officer may withdraw the appeal, or accept the review, provided all other conditions are met.
DUE DATES | |||||
LAST DATE TO ISSUE GST SHOW CAUSE NOTICE & ORDER FOR F.Y. 2017-18 TO F.Y. 2020-21 | |||||
TAX PERIOD (F.Y.) DUE DATE OR EXTENDED DATE OF ANNUAL RETURN | NON-FRAUD CAESE u/s 73 of CGST | FRAUD CASES u/s 74 of CGST | |||
NOTICE | ORDER | NOTICE | ORDER | ||
3 MONTHS BEFORE ORDER | WITHIN 3 YRS OF DUE DATE OF ANNUAL RETURN | NOTICE 6 MONTHS BEFORE ORDER | WITHIN 5 YR OF DUE DATE OF ANNUAL RETURN | ||
2017-18 | 05-Feb-2020 | 30-Sep-2023 (Time barred) | 31-Dec-2023 (Time Barred) | 05-Aug-2024 (Time Barred) | 05-Feb-2025 (Approaching) |
2018-19 | 31-Dec-2020 | 31-Jan-2024 (Time Barred) | 30-Apr-2024 (Time Barred) | 30-June-2025 | 31-Dec-2025 |
2019 -20 | 31-Mar-2021 | 31-May- 2024 (Time Barred) | 31-Aug-2024 (Time Barred) | 30-Sep-2025 | 31-Mar-2026 |
2020-21 | 28-Feb-2022 | 30-Nov-2024 (Time Barred) | 28-Feb-2025 (Approaching) | 31-Aug-2026 | 28-Feb-2027 |
LEGAL MAXIMS
Quo warranto | By what authority. A writ calling upon one to show under what authority he holds or claims a public office. |
Ratio decidendi | Principle or reason underlying a court Judgement or The rule of law on which a judicial decision is based. |
Repudiate | To refuse to accept. |
Res Judicata | A matter already judged. |
Respondeat superior | Let the master answer. |
Disclaimer: Pursuant to the Bar Council of India rules, we are not permitted to solicit work and advertise. You, the reader acknowledges that there has been no advertisement, personal communication, solicitation, invitation or inducement of any sort whatsoever from us or any of our members to solicit any work through this newsletter. The information provided in this newsletter is solely available at your request and is for informational purposes only, it should not be interpreted as soliciting or advisement. We are not liable for any consequence of any action taken by the reader relying on material/ information provided in the newsletter. In cases where the reader has any legal issues, he/she must in all cases seek independent legal advice. Any information obtained or materials used from this newsletter is completely at the reader’s volition and any transmission, receiptor use of the contents of this newsletter would not create any lawyer-client relationship.