GST NEWS
GST evasion surpasses Rs 15K Crore figures: MoS
GST - NAA receives over 360 complaints till Nov-end
GST HIGH COURT CASES
2019-TIOL-05-HC-MAD-GST
Preethi Kitchen Appliances Pvt Ltd Vs State Tax Officer
GST - Detention of goods on the ground that Part-B of the E-way bill was not updated - Petitioner submitting that without prejudice to the contention of the petitioner that they had filed Part-B properly, they will pay one time tax under the CGST Act and SGST Act for the purpose of releasing the goods and agitate the matter before appropriate authority by way of filing revision.
Held: Without expressing any view on the merits of the contentions raised by the petitioner as well as the respondents in the impugned detention proceedings, writ petition is disposed of subject to the petitioner paying the one-time tax liability within four days and on receipt of such payment, the detained goods are to be released forthwith - Petitioner granted liberty to agitate matter before appropriate authority: High Court [para 6]
- Petition disposed of: MADRAS HIGH COURT
2019-TIOL-04-HC-HP-GST
Scott Edil Pharmacia Ltd Vs Assistant Commissioner, State Taxes And Excise
CGST - Petitioner assails the order passed by Asstt. Commissioner whereby the petitioner-Company has been held guilty of suppressing Gross Turn Over of Rs. 95,90,00,000/- and consequently, it has been subjected to SGST and penalty to the tune of Rs. 23,01,60,000/ - Petitioner submits that the order is appealable before Commissioner(A) u/s 107 of the Act, however, since no such appellate forum has been notified for the State of Himachal Pradesh, they have been denied valuable right of appeal and left with no other option, the present petition has been filed.
Held: In view of the fact that the Statute contemplates the remedy of appeal, High Court is of the view that the aggrieved party cannot be left remediless merely because the State Government has not notified the Appellate Forum - Writ Petition is disposed of with a direction to the Additional Chief Secretary-cum-Financial Commissioner, State Taxes and Excise, to notify the Appellate Forum within one week - Petitioner may file an appeal within one week from the date of said notification - No coercive action to be taken against petitioner: High Court [para 4]
- Petition disposed of: GST: HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT
2019-TIOL-03-HC-KERALA-GST
Coastal Hardwares And Sanitaries Vs GST Council
GST - Petitioner asserts that though he attempted to upload Form GST TRAN-1 within the stipulated time, he failed because of some system error - Petitioner, therefore, seeks directions to enable him to take credit of the available input tax.
Held: In view of the CBIC Circular 39/13/2018 dated April 03, 2018, Petitioner may apply to the sixth respondent, the Nodal Officer who will look into the issue and facilitate the petitioner's uploading FORM GST TRAN-1, without reference to the time-frame - if the petitioner applies within two weeks, nodal officer to take steps within one week thereafter - If the uploading of FORM GST TRAN-1 is not possible for reasons not attributable to the petitioner, the authority will also enable him to take credit of the input tax available at the time of migration - Petition disposed of: High Court [para 5, 6]
- Petition disposed of: KERALA HIGH COURT
2019-TIOL-02-HC-KAR-GST
Bright Road Logistics Pvt Ltd Vs Commercial Officer
GST - On the ground that the consignment was not accompanied by valid documents like tax invoice and e-way bill and the same was in contravention of the provision of Section 68(1) of the CGST Act, 2017 and KGST Act, 2017, proceedings initiated - Petitioner challenges detention order and the order of confiscation of goods and conveyance and demand of tax, fine and penalty on the ground that the same have been passed without affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner - Petitioner places reliance on the decision - 2018-TIOL-67-HC-KERALA-GST in the case of The Assistant State Tax Officer Vs. M/s. Indus Towers Limited.
Held: Contention raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner that no opportunity has been afforded under Section 129 (4) of the CGST Act stands falsified - alleged owners have waived the right of hearing and have consented, levy of tax and penalty and have undertaken to pay as per the provisions of Section 129(1)(a) of the CGST Act - factual aspects have to be gone into and adjudicated by the fact finding authority and Court cannot exercise its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution - No declaration has been made by the consignees either prior to the commencement of transport or even after the goods have been seized - hence cited ruling is distinguishable and not applicable to the facts of the present case - Proper officer proceeded to pass the rectification order after taking into consideration the objections and hence, the same is nothing but an attempt by the Proper Officer to ensure that the objections filed and contention raised by the petitioner are considered in the proper perspective and in the manner required under the Act, hence, no malafides can be attributed to the same - matter requires adjudication of facts, which are seriously disputed by the parties - This Court in exercise of supervisory jurisdiction cannot enter upon and adjudicate factual issues under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, in the light of availability of an alternative remedy - Petition is rejected: High Court [para 7, 8, 10, 14 to 16]
- Petition rejected: KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
DIPP NOTIFICATION
F.No.16(35)/2018-NER
DIPP notifies Incentive Scheme for industrial units in Andaman & Nicobar Islands & Lakshadweep Islands
ARTICLES
Cancellation of Registration - Refund of Input Tax Credit
Debit sequence of unutilized ITC for GST refund
GST & Duty free shops
GST - Agenda for the second year - Part XIX
GST: Santa Claus comes calling 'Merry Christmas'...! - Part IV
