2022-TIOL-1332-HC-RAJ-GST
Amp Motors Pvt Ltd Vs CBIC
GST - Petitioner has sought to assail SCN on issue of jurisdiction that once the assessment matter of petitioner was assigned to Central Taxation Authorities, State Authority does not have jurisdiction to initiate proceedings under Section 73 of the Act of 2017 - The argument, which has been raised by petitioner is based on alleged violation of certain statutory provisions, which have been opposed by revenue and whether or not it is a case of statutory violation itself will depend upon consideration of various factual aspects of the case - Violation of provisions contained in Rule 142 of Central/State Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017 as alleged by petitioner, has been repelled by revenue by stating that petitioner has relied upon unamended provisions - Petitioner seems to be aggrieved by issuance of SCN insofar as it is proposing imposition of tax based on discrepancy in Input Tax Credit details in GSTR-02A and GSTR-03B is concerned - It is not the case of petitioner that there is no discrepancy at all - Therefore, petitioner instead of challenging SCN at this stage should workout its remedy - At present, only SCN has been issued - The petitioner may raise various grounds, except the issue of jurisdiction, which has been raised in petition and same are required to be considered by authority - In the event, petitioner suffers any orders prejudicial to its interest, it is open for petitioner to take such remedy as may be available to it under the law: HC
- Writ petition dismissed: RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
2022-TIOL-1331-HC-RAJ-GST
Swaroop Art Vs UoI
GST - Registration of the petitioner came to be cancelled by the competent authority vide order dated 15.02.2022 - Against cancellation of the registration, the petitioner filed e-appeal on 17.06.2022 but could not submit the hard-copy within the prescribed period of limitation, therefore, the appeal was dismissed - Petition filed by relying on various decisions and submitting that the petitioner cannot be left remediless for hyper-technical reasons; that owing to cancellation of GST registration the petitioner is being deprived of the opportunity to do business and which has resulted in loss of all avenues of earning livelihood and is violative of the right to life and liberty as guaranteed by Article 21 of the Constitution; that one more opportunity deserves to be provided to petitioner to file appeal and the competent authority may be directed to decide such appeal as per law.
Held: It cannot be denied that the petitioner herein would not be able to continue with his business in absence of GST registration and thus, would be deprived of his livelihood which amounts to violation of right to life and liberty as enshrined in Article 21 of the Constitution of India - In this background, the order dated 21.09.2022 is set aside - The petitioner is given liberty to file appeal against the cancellation of GST registration to the competent authority within ten days and upon such appeal being filed, the same shall be considered and decided on all aspects in accordance with law excluding the bar of limitation in preferring the appeal - Petition disposed of: High Court
- Petition disposed of: RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
2022-TIOL-1330-HC-DEL-GST
Uflix Industries Vs UoI
GST - A provisional attachment order was issued on 18.03.2020 freezing the bank account qua the petitioner in exercise of powers u/s 83 of the Act - Allegation of Revenue is that the petitioner had been availing input tax credit (ITC) fraudulently and which amount is Rs.60,08,750/- and which along with interest totals Rs.75,16,900/- - Petitioner informs that the entire amount along with interest has been reversed by them - Counsel for respondent revenue informs that the investigation stands concluded and the department was in the process of lifting the provisional attachment order; however, penalty is required to be recovered.
Held: Bench notes that matter has been hanging fire without the respondent/revenue taking requisite steps, either vis-a-vis the petition or with regard to imposition and/or recovery of penalty - Given the fact that the present attachment has continued beyond the time frame prescribed u/s 83(2) of one year, Bench is inclined to direct that the same be lifted - Writ petition is disposed of: High Court [para 6, 8]
- Petition disposed of: DELHI HIGH COURT
2022-TIOL-120-AAR-GST
Siddhartha Constructions
GST - Applicant has executed works contracts for Telangana State Industrial Infrastructure Corporation Limited (TSIIC) which is a government entity - Work relates to construction of IT Incubation Centre and, therefore, the civil structure is meant for commerce/industry or any other business - Resultantly, the works contract executed by the applicant for construction of IT Incubation Centre for TSIIC falls under exception to Sr. no. 3(vi) of 11/2017-CTR wherein the civil structure is meant for commerce/industry or any other business and, therefore, the supply of such service is taxable @9% CGST and SGST each - Held, therefore, that the services provided by applicant to TSIIC is not entitled for concessional rate of tax of 12% but attracts tax @18%: AAR
- Application disposed of: AAR
