FLASH NEWS GST - Gujarat says no e-Way Bill needed for intra-city transport of goods of any value
TOP NEWS
GST Registrations - Cancellation - Pendency is more acute in UP, Gujarat & Maharashtra
GST HIGH COURT - CASES
2018-TIOL-126-HC-MP-GST + Case Story
Advantage India Logistics Pvt Ltd Vs UoI
GST - Officers appointed under the MPGST Act are authorized to be proper officers for the purpose of IGST - contention of the petitioner that in absence of any notification under Section 4 of the IGST Act, action of the respondent MP State government authorities is without jurisdiction has no force - by order dated 12.10.2017, the respondent was authorized as proper officer and was bestowed with powers such as inspection, search and seizure under Section 68 of the MPGST Act - final order dated 23.07.2018 passed by jurisdictional authorities directing the petitioner to pay an amount of Rs.4,20,266/- (minimum) as tax and penalty in terms of Section 129(3) of the MPGST Act is an appealable order u/s 109 of the Act – Petition seeking quashing of the seizure memo/order is not entertainable, hence dismissed: High Court [para 11, 13, 14]
- Petition dismissed: MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT
2018-TIOL-125-HC-AHM-GST
Indus Projects Ltd Vs UoI
GST - Dues of Rs.3.85 crores payable by the assessee - Petitioner, due to financial difficulties applied to the authority for installments facility but same was rejected by order dated 30.08.2018 without assigning any reasons - Petitioner submits that department Circular permits the authority to grant suitable installment facility when financial hardship is made out.
Held: Notice issued - On the condition that the petitioner deposits 20% of the outstanding amount before 17.10.2018 and continues to deposit 5% thereof between 1 st and 5 th of every month thereafter until any other order is passed, there shall be stay against coercive recoveries of dues: High Court [para 2]
- Interim order passed: GUJARAT HIGH COURT
2018-TIOL-124-HC-AHM-GST
Shree Rama Newsprint Ltd Vs UoI
GST - The present petition challenges the validity of Rule 89(5) of the CGST Rules 2017 as amended by Notfn No 21/2018-CT & Notfn No 26/2018-CT as ultra vires - Duty demands were raised against the petitioner - Thus it is claimed that such provision denies refund of unutilized credit in respect of tax paid on input services - The petitioner drew attention to provisions of Sections 53 & 54 pertaining to refund as well as Sections 2(59), 2(60), 2(62) & 2(63) and Rule 89 which pertain to application for refund of tax, interest, penalty, fees or any other amount.
Held - Considering such submissions and the laws highlighted, notices be issued to parties & returnable on October 10, 2018 - Meanwhile, stay is granted on notice raising duty demand: HC
- Notice issued: GUJARAT HIGH COURT
2018-TIOL-123-HC-AHM-GST
Dishman Carbogen Amcis Ltd Vs UoI
GST - The petitioner company sought to bring over certain amount of unutilized credit from the pre-GST regime to the GST regime - It claimed to be unable to file necessary declaration in this regard owing to technical glitches - Hence it seeks directions enabling availment of such credit u/s 140 of CGST Act - It also challenged the validity of Rule 117 of CGST Rules, which prescribe time limit for filing such declaration by a dealer.
Held - It may be noted that the validity of Rule 117 was upheld in another decision - Hence the challenge to such provision is not sustainable - Besides, Rule (1A) had been inserted in Rule 117 wherein the Commissioner can extend the time limit till March 31, 2019 for making such declation in case such declaration could not be made due to technical glitches - Thus the petitioner can seek such remedy: HC
- Writ petition disposed of: GUJARAT HIGH COURT
ARTICLES
Adopting Blockchain technology in the Customs Ecosystem
Understanding Income Tax Assessment Procedure
GST - Agenda for the second year- Part IV
Applicability of GST on DFIA Scrips
Refund of Integrated tax paid on goods exported - retro amendment again
