Home Case Index All Cases GST 2022 2022 This

Law	-- All -- GST Income Tax Benami Property Customs Corporate Laws Securities / SEBI Insolvency & Bankruptcy FEMA PMLA Service Tax Central Excise CST, VAT & Sales Tax Wealth tax Indian Laws
Court	-- Any -- Supreme Court SC Orders / Highlights High Court Appellate Tribunal Tribunal Appellate authority for Advance Ruling Advance Ruling Authority National Financial Reporting Authority Competition Commission of India ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY Commission Central Government Board DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court Commissioner / Appellate Authority Other
Citation	--Year-- 2024 2023 2022 2021 2020 2019 2018 2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001 2000 1999 1998 1997 1996 1995 1994 1993 1992 1991 1990 1989 1988 1987 1986 1985 1984 1983 1982 1981 1980 1979 1978 1977 1976 1975 1974 1973 1972 1971 1970 1969 1968 1967 1966 1965 1964 1963 1962 1961 1960 1959 1958 1957 1956 1955 1954 1953 1952 1951 1950 Upto 1949 - -Volume- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 -
Landmark	Nil - N/A Referred in >= 3 Cases Referred in >= 4 Cases Referred in >= 5 Cases Referred in >= 10 Cases Referred in >= 15 Cases Referred in >= 25 Cases Referred in >= 50 Cases Referred in >= 100 Cases
Order by	TMI Citation Date of Decision

Advanced Search Options

GST - Case Laws

Showing 21 to 40 of 1928 Records

• 2022 (12) TMI 1324 - AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULING, UTTAR PRADESH
  

  Classification of supply of services - supply of Services by the Applicant to M/s. UTTAR PRADESH JAL NIGAM - local authority or not - Governmental authority or not - scope of N/N. 15/2021 Central Tax (Rate), dated 18th November, 2021 r/w. N/N. 22/2021- Central Tax (Rate), dated 31st December, 2021 - applicable rate of Tax under the Goods and Services Tax Act. 2017 on such Supplies made w.e.f. 01-01-2022 - applicable rate of tax on such supplies under the Good's and Services Tax Act, made w.e.f. 01-01-2022.

  Whether the Uttar Pradesh Jal Nigam (UPJN) is local authority or not? - HELD THAT:- The applicant have arrived at conclusion that UPJN is local authority on the basis of 4th character of PAN of UPJN being 'L' and the registration certificate of UPJN bearing constitution as local authority.

  Constitution of UPJN - HELD THAT:- UPJN was created by the Government of Uttar Pradesh by enacting the U.P. Water Supply and Sewerage Act, 1975 (hereinafter referred to as the UPWSS Act). It is a body corporate having perpetual succession and a common seal and capable of suing and being sued in its name. It has power to acquire, hold and dispose of the property - the definition of local authority in the CGST" Act includes within its ambit any other authority legally entitled to or entrusted by the Central Government or any State Government with the control or management of a municipal or local fund. Thus, for the purpose of the GST Laws, any authority legally entitled to or entrusted by the Government with the control or management of a municipal or local fund qualifies as a local authority.

  The Apex court in the RC Jain case [1981 (2) TMI 200 - SUPREME COURT] has held that that the authority should be elected by the inhabitants of the area. As per Section 4 of the UPWSS Act, the UPJN shall consist of Chairman and members appointed by the state government. As such, the UPJN is not elected by the inhabitants of the area but the same is established by the state. Therefore, the said is not satisfied in the case of UPJN - In case of UPJN, there is no local fund entrusted by the Government with UPJN. A perusal of the UPWSS Act would reveal that no municipal or local fund has been entrusted by the Government. The fund of UPJN is its own fund and cannot be equated with a fund entrusted by the Government. Thus, the important requirement in order to qualify as a local authority, viz. control and management of a municipal/local fund is absent in the present case - the UPJN is not a 'local authority'.

  Whether the UPJN is Governmental Authority? - HELD THAT:- To qualify as a governmental authority, such authority must be set up by an act of Parliament/State Legislature, should have 90% or more stake of government, and should carry out any function entrusted to a Municipality under article 243 W of the Constitution of India - the UPJN is a body corporate formed by the State legislature under UPWSS Act enacted by the UP State Legislature. As such, the first requirement of a governmental authority stands fulfilled in the present case. Further, as per Section 3 of the UPWSS Act, UPJN is a body corporate established by the Government of U.P., as such, the second requirement of governmental authority has also been fulfilled in the present case. Moreover, the UPJN is constituted for the development and regulation of water supply and sewerage services in the State of U.P. Under the Section 14 of UPWSS Act, UPJN is inter alia entrusted with the function to operate, run, and maintain any waterworks and sewerage system.

  As per Article 243 W read with Twelfth Schedule of the Constitution of India, water supply for domestic, industrial and commercial purposes and public health, sanitation conservancy and solid waste management is a function of municipality. The requirement that the authority must be established to carry out any function entrusted to a Municipality under article 243 W of the Constitution has also been fulfilled in the present case. Thus, the UPJN is a governmental authority - by way of Notification No. 22/2021-Central Tax (Rate) dated 31.12.2021, the lower rate of tax of 12% provided by Entry 3(iii) of Notification No.11/2017- Central Tax (Rate) dated June 28, 2017, was restricted to works contract supplied to Central Government, State Government, Union territory and a local authority only with effect from 01.01.2022. As the UPJN does not qualify as a 'local authority' and it qualifies as a governmental authority, tax rate of 18% is applicable on the works contract services provided to UPJN by way of Entry 3(xii) of Notification No. 11/2017- Central Tax (Rate) dated June 28, 2017.

  ---

• 2022 (12) TMI 1293 - KERALA HIGH COURT
  

  Cancellation of registration of petitioner - non filing of returns for a period of six months - It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner had filed returns for the defaulted period but did not file any appeal under Section 107 against Ext.P3 order of cancellation - HELD THAT:- This writ petition is liable to be allowed. The show cause notice issued to the petitioner in this case is produced as Ext.P2. A perusal of Ext.P2 shows that the same has been issued in Form GST Reg 31. The said form is one for suspension of revocation and not for cancellation of registration.

  The notice is absolutely vague and it is not clearly specified with any clarity, the reasons for proposing cancellation even the period for which there was alleged failure to file returns is not specified.

  The quashing of the impugned order of cancellation will not have the effect of absolving the petitioner of any fiscal liability. The petitioner will be required to file all defaulted returns together with tax, late fee, interest, penalty etc., within a period of two weeks from the date on which the registration of the petitioner is restored in compliance with this judgment - Petition allowed.

  ---

• 2022 (12) TMI 1292 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
  

  Maintainability of petition - availability of alternative remedy of appeal - Refund claim - Intermediary services - Circular bearing No.159/15/2021-GST dated 20.09.2021 - learned counsel for the respondents submits that in view of availability of equitable and alternative remedy by way of an appeal to the Appellate Authority as well as the Tribunal, the present petition is not maintainable - HELD THAT:- In the light of the submission and the Circular dated 20.09.2021 which has come into effect during the pendency of the present writ petition, it is opined that the impugned orders as well as the refund orders at Annexure-K dated 11.02.2019, Annexure-L dated 22.05.2019, Annexure-M dated 25.05.2019 and Annexure-N dated 14.12.2019 deserve to be set aside and the matter deserves to be remitted back to the concerned respondents for reconsideration afresh in accordance with law.

  Petition allowed by way of remand.

  ---

• 2022 (12) TMI 1291 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT
  

  Confiscation and detention of goods and conveyance - interaction, interplay and inter se application of Section 129 and Section 130 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 - HELD THAT:- As could be seen from the impugned order, the penalty amount is Rs. 2,14,690/-. The fine and other charges are demanded to the extent of Rs.11,92,726/- and the tax is demanded of Rs.2,14,690/-.

  By way of interim relief, it is directed that the respondents shall release the goods and conveyance of the petitioner, confiscated and detained pursuant to the aforementioned order No. 8 dated 21.04.2022 passed in FORM GST MOV-11, subject to the following conditions imposed - application disposed off.

  ---

• 2022 (12) TMI 1290 - AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULING, UTTAR PRADESH
  

  Classification of goods - HSN code - rate of GST - eco-friendly expandable paper wrap (honeycomb paper for wrapping) - to be classifiable under 48239013 or 48084090? - HELD THAT:- It is observed that the Tariff Item 4823 covers articles of paper and Tariff Item 48239013 has description as “Packing and Wrapping Paper” and all type of packing and wrapping paper will fall in 48239013 which is a specific tariff item for packing and wrapping paper - As per Rule 3(a) of General Rules for the Interpretation of Import Tariff, the heading which provides the most specific description shall be preferred to headings providing general description. The Tariff item 48239013 contains specific description of Packing and wrapping paper. The product “eco-friendly expandable paper wrap (honeycomb paper for wrapping)' is manufactured from the kraft paper and adhesives and the same is used in wrapping/packing as such Rule 3(a) of General Rules for the Interpretation of Import Tariff will apply and the same merits classification under HSN 48239013.

  In the landmark judgement of RAMESWARLAL MURLIDHAR VERSUS STATE OF ORISSA [1981 (4) TMI 254 - SC ORDER], Hon'ble Supreme Court has observed that, Paper may be presented in plain sheets or in exercise books or in big rolls. It may be thick or thin, light to heavy, bleached or coloured, according to the requirement of purchasers. The form in which the paper is presented or sold is not a conclusive test, but the use to which it is put would furnish a guiding principle.

  Although, there is no specific entry for the product 'eco-friendly expandable paper wrap (honeycomb paper for wrapping) in Notification No. 1/2017-Central Tax (Rate) dated 28.06.2017, there is an entry most akin to the product and process ( at Sr. No. 157 of Schedule III of Notification No.1/2017 CENTRAL TAX (Rate) Dated 28-6-2017 and attracts 9% CGST and 9% SGST or 18% IGST.

  In the instant case the assessee have themselves declared their product to be “a packing material used for packing of goods as a cushioning material, separators or edge protector to make shipping cartons of goods and as pallets and pallet boxes” - Hence the eco-friendly expandable paper wrap (honeycomb paper for wrapping) merits to be classified under heading 48239013.

  ---

• 2022 (12) TMI 1289 - AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULING, UTTAR PRADESH
  

  Benefit of concessional rate of GST - Supply of works contract to the Indian Railways - construction services - classified under Entry 3(v)(a) of Notification No. 8/2017-Integrated Tax (Rate) dated 28.06.2017 or not - HELD THAT:- The entry 3(v)(a) of Notification No. 8/2017-lntegrated Tax (Rate) dated 28.06.2017 prescribes the rate of 12% for Composite supply of works contract {as defined in clause (119) of section 2 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017}, other than that covered by items (I), (ia), (ib), (ic), (id), (ie) and (if) of the above notification supplied by way of construction, erection, commissioning, or installation of original works pertaining to railways, including monorail and metro.

  Immovable property has not been defined in the CGST Act. Definition of Immovable Property is given in Clause 3 (26) of General Clauses Act, 1897 which says that "immovable property shall include land, benefits arising out of land and things attached to earth, or permanently fastened to anything attached to earth. " - As per Section 3 of the Transfer of Property Act 1882, the phrase "attached to earth" means- (a) rooted in the earth, as in the case of trees and shrubs; (b) imbedded in the earth, as in the case of walls or buildings; or (c) attached to what is so imbedded for the permanent beneficial enjoyment of that to which it is attached.

  The goods involved in repair and maintenance of 'open line' as well as in 'construction line' are welding material and paints are consumed purely during the execution of contract and hence the same shall not be treated as 'transfer of property in goods', as lawful convey and absolute transfer of ownership of the said property i.e. consumable goods does not take place.

  The supply provided by the applicant does not fall under the category of 'new construction' as the applicant is not doing any work relating to new construction. Even in case of work relating to 'construction lines' wherein new railway tracks are constructed, the applicant is not constructing new railway line and only supplying completion and finishing services in respect of 'construction lines' wherein the applicant has to provide welding work and painting work - The supply provided by the applicant do not fall under the category of ' all types of additions and alterations to abandoned or damaged structures on land that are required to make them workable' in case of construction lines. Even in case of Open Lines, the railway lines which are replaced on completion of shelf life are not abandoned or damaged structures. Further, there is no erection, commissioning or installation of plant, machinery or equipment or structures, whether pre-fabricated or otherwise during execution of contracts by the applicant.

  As such, the applicant is not entitled to benefit of entry 3(v)(a) of Notification No. 8/2017-Integrated Tax (Rate) dated 28.06.2017 because- (i) there is no contract for building, construction, fabrication, completion, erection, Installation, fitting out, improvement, modification, repair, maintenance, renovation, alteration or commissioning of any immovable property, (ii) there is no transfer of property in goods (whether as goods or in some other form) involved in the execution of contracts and (iii) The supply is not by way of construction, erection, commissioning, or installation of original works.

  The appropriate rate of IGST payable by the applicant on services provided on 'construction line' as well as 'open line' is 18%.

  ---

• 2022 (12) TMI 1288 - AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULING, UTTAR PRADESH
  

  Composite works contract services - Local authority or not - Governmental Authority or not - services supplied to Uttar Pradesh Jal Nigam involving construction & design of prestressed concrete cylinder pipelines (PCCP) and pumping plant for the purpose of supplying water to the Khurja Sewerage Treatment Plant Project from the Mundakhera Reservoir to the pond of Khurja STPP - ancillary works such as development of roads/paths, drain septic Tanks, sewer line, water supply system, external electrification, service connection to building, etc - Entry 3(iii) of the Notification No. 11/2017-Central Tax (Rate) dated 28.06.2017.

  HELD THAT:- The definition of local authority in the CGST Act includes within its ambit any other authority legally entitled to or entrusted by the Central Government or any State Government with the control or management of a municipal or local fund. Thus, for the purpose of the GST Laws, any authority legally entitled to or entrusted by the Government with the control or management of a municipal or local fund qualifies as a local authority.

  The Apex court in the UNION OF INDIA & ORS. VERSUS RC. JAIN & ORS. [1981 (2) TMI 200 - SUPREME COURT] has held that that the authority should be elected by the inhabitants of the area. As per Section 4 of the UPWSS Act, the UPJN shall consist of Chairman and members appointed by the state government. As such, the UPJN is not elected by the inhabitants of the area but the same is established by the state. Therefore, the said is not satisfied in the case of UPJN - Apex court in the RC Jain case has held that that the authority must enjoy a certain degree of autonomy, with freedom to decide for themselves questions of policy affecting the area administered by them. The autonomy may not be complete and the degree of the dependence may vary considerably but, an appreciable measure of autonomy there must be. Perusal of the UPWSS Act reveals that the UPJN is not enjoying appreciable nature of autonomy.

  Whether the UPJN is Governmental Authority? - HELD THAT:- The UPJN is a body corporate formed by the State legislature under UPWSS Act enacted by the UP State Legislature. As such, the first requirement of a governmental authority stands fulfilled in the present case. Further, as per Section 3 of the UPWSS Act, UPJN is a body corporate established by the Government of U.P., as such, the second requirement of governmental authority has also been fulfilled in the present case. Moreover, the UPJN is constituted for the development and regulation of water supply and sewerage services in the State of U.P. Under the Section 14 of UPWSS Act, UPJN is inter alia entrusted with the function to operate, run, and maintain any waterworks and sewerage system. As per Article 243W read with Twelfth Schedule of the Constitution of India, water supply for domestic, industrial and commercial purposes and public health, sanitation conservancy and solid waste management is a function of municipality. In view of the above, the requirement that the authority must be established to carry out any function entrusted to a Municipality under article 243 W of the Constitution has also been fulfilled in the present case. Thus, the UPJN is a governmental authority.

  By way of Notification No. 15/2021-Central Tax (Rate) dated November 18, 2021, the lower rate of tax of 12% provided by Entry 3(iii) of Notification No.11/2017- Central Tax (Rate) dated June 28, 2017, was restricted to works contract supplied to Central Government, State Government, Union territory and a local authority only. As the UPJN does not qualify as a local authority and it qualifies as a governmental authority, tax rate of 18% is applicable on the works contract services provided to UPJN by way of Entry 3(xii) of Notification No. 11/2017- Central Tax (Rate) dated June 28, 2017.

  ---

• 2022 (12) TMI 1236 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
  

  Seeking provisional release of seized goods - detention of goods on the ground that E-way bill was not generated for movement of the consignment - HELD THAT:- This Court would now set aside the impugned order. This means that the matter reverts to the detention/seizure order under Section 129(1) of TN-G&ST Act. This Court would also now be directing the respondent to redo Section 129(3) legal drill after affording a fresh opportunity to the writ petitioner.

  In this view of the matter, as Section 129(1) scenario gets revived, learned counsel for writ petitioner on instructions submits that the writ petitioner is ready to furnish Bank Guarantee for the entire amount payable qua Section 129(1)(a) i.e., penalty of 200% of the tax payable. This submission is recorded.

  Impugned order under Section 129(3) is set aside - the writ petitioner shall furnish Bank Guarantee as per 129(1)(c) read with Section 129(1)(a) i.e., (penalty equivalent to 200% of the tax payable) latest by Monday i.e., by 26.12.2022 - application disposed off.

  ---

• 2022 (12) TMI 1235 - PATNA HIGH COURT
  

  Maintainability of petition - availability of alternative remedy - fair opportunity of hearing - ex-parte order - violation of principles of natural justice - HELD THAT:- This Court, notwithstanding the statutory remedy, is not precluded from interfering where, ex facie, we form an opinion that the order is bad in law. This we say so, for two reasons - (a) violation of principles of natural justice, i.e. fair opportunity of hearing. No sufficient time was afforded to the petitioner to represent his case and (b) order passed ex parte in nature, does not assign any reasons sufficient even decipherable from the record, as to how the officer could determine the amount due and payable by the assessee. The order, ex parte in nature, passed in violation of the principles of natural justice, entails civil consequences, (c) We also find the authorities not to have adjudicated the matter on the attending facts and circumstances. All issues of fact and law ought to have been dealt with, even if the proceedings were ex parte in nature. As such, on this short ground alone, we dispose of the present writ petition.

  The instant petition sands disposed of.

  ---

• 2022 (12) TMI 1234 - DELHI HIGH COURT
  

  Freezing of Bank Accounts of petitioner - petitioner claims that it was denied access to its bank account on 05.11.2021 without being informed of any reason for the same, since then the petitioner is unable to operate the bank account - HELD THAT:- Section 83 of the CGST Act empowers the concerned authority to provisionally attach assets, in cases where the proceedings have been initiated under Chapter XII, XIV or XV of the CGST Act and the Commissioner is of the opinion that for the purpose of protecting the interest of the Government revenue, it is necessary to issue provisional attachment.

  In the present case, it is contended on behalf of the respondent that information had been received from another Commissionerate (DGGI, Ghaziabad) that certain entities have colluded to fraudulently avail GST. Apparently, the petitioner was named as one of the suspicious entities - In so far as the reasons for freezing the bank account is concerned, the petitioner is at liberty to approach the ICICI Bank for seeking the reasons for freezing the bank account. The bank is directed to provide the petitioner the reasons for the same.

  Petition is disposed off.

  ---

• 2022 (12) TMI 1233 - JHARKHAND HIGH COURT
  

  Maintainability of the writ petition - Availability of efficacious remedy of appeal - dispute pertains to questions of fact - seeking direction upon the respondents to show cause as to how an Officer of the State Taxes could carry out the proceedings under Section 129 of CGST Act - HELD THAT:- Taking into consideration that an efficacious alternative remedy by way of appeal is available to the petitioner under Section 107 of JGST Act, we therefore, grant liberty to the petitioner to approach the appellate authority against the impugned order passed under Form GST MOV 09. On his approaching, the State Taxes Officer, Intelligence Bureau, Dhanbad Division, Dhanbad shall provide the GSTIN number so that the petitioner can prefer an appeal online. In case the appeal is not accepted online for any technical reasons, he would be at liberty to prefer an appeal manually before the appellate authority.

  Writ petition is disposed off.

  ---

• 2022 (12) TMI 1232 - CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT
  

  Refund of additional tax liability incurred by the petitioner in the light of GST law introduced w.e.f. 1.7.2017 onwards - HELD THAT:- Reliance placed upon the order of this Court in M/S D.A. ENTERPRISES THROUGH ITS PROPRIETOR DINESH KUMAR MISHRA VERSUS STATE OF CHHATTISGARH THROUGH THE SECRETARY; CHIEF ENGINEER HASDEO BASIN; SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER; EXECUTIVE ENGINEER MANIYARI [2022 (12) TMI 1136 - CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT], wherein under identical set of facts, this Court has allowed the said writ petition.

  Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and also taking into consideration the judgment of this Court in the case of M/s D.A. Enterprises, the writ petition as of now stands disposed of permitting the petitioner to approach respondents No.2 to 5 in terms of the order of the State Government dated 10.10.2018 (Annexure P-2). The petitioner is also required to produce before the authority concern necessary proof of the additional tax liability incurred on account of the introduction of the GST law within a period of one week - petition disposed off.

  ---

• 2022 (12) TMI 1231 - DELHI HIGH COURT
  

  Release of seized perishable goods - conclusion of adjudication proceedings expeditiously - seeking cross examination of the Panch witnesses, other witnesses whose statements are relied upon in the Show Cause Notice and the officers of the DGGI - allegations made against the petitioners is that they had fraudulently availed input tax credit - HELD THAT:- The learned counsel for the petitioners states that although the replies to the Show Cause Notice (SCN No. 8/2021) were termed as interim replies, the same may be considered as final and the adjudicating authority may proceed on the said basis.

  Insofar as the petitioner’s request for permission to cross-examine certain witnesses and officers is concerned, this Court does not consider it apposite to decide the same in these proceedings - The adjudicating authority is requested to complete the proceedings pursuant to the show cause notice as expeditiously as possible and in any event within a period of four months from today. The adjudicating authority shall consider and dispose of the petition’s application for cross examination of witnesses/officers in accordance with law.

  The petition is disposed of.

  ---

• 2022 (12) TMI 1230 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
  

  Seeking provisional release of seized goods - petitioner submitted that E-way bill can be applied for only after weighment at the weigh bridge - consignment was transported by truck from the Railway yard to a weigh bridge and the interception occurred during such transit - HELD THAT:- This writ Court refrains itself from expressing any opinion or view on the same. There is another reason as to why this writ Court refrains itself from expressing any opinion and proceeds to dispose of the writ petition. That other reason is, learned Revenue counsel, on instructions, submits that pursuant to interception on 06.12.2022, a show-cause notice as statutorily required under Section 129(3) of C-G&ST Act has been issued to the writ petitioner on 07.12.2022, the writ petitioner has sent a reply on the same day, the third respondent has considered the same and has made an order dated 09.12.2022, which has been placed before this Court.

  To be noted, copy of the 09.12.2022 proceedings has been handed over by the learned Revenue counsel to the learned counsel for writ petitioner today. If the writ petitioner chooses to do the same in accordance with law, the Authority / forum / Court would consider the same on its own merits and in accordance with law untrammelled by any observation in this order which has been made for the limited purpose of disposal of captioned writ petition.

  The writ petition fails and the same is dismissed.

  ---

• 2022 (12) TMI 1229 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT
  

  Validity of Assessment order and Demand of GST - It was alleged that the petitioner was supplied nil rated or exempted supply, but he had not reversed the ITC related to the said exempt supply as per Section 17(2) - violation of principle of natural justice - HELD THAT:- This Court notices that this is not the case where the Court would like to employ the ratio laid down in case of Graziano Transmission India Private Limited vs. State of Gujarat [2022 (7) TMI 752 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT]. As the facts were completely different and here as can be noticed, his request for adjournment had been acceded to not for 30 days, but for 15 days. The online portal also is indicative of the fact that it was for both adjournment and the personal hearing, however, on 11.02.2022 admittedly, neither the response was given in writing nor had the petitioner appeared in person. He also never bothered thereafter to know as to what had happened on 11.02.2022.

  It is also a matter of record that search was conducted at the official premise on 17.02.2022 and consequent upon the said search not only the petitioner, but some other employees were also called by the officer concerned for recording the statement and eventually on 21.02.2022, the order came to be passed which is impugned. He has reversed credit as has been detailed in the petition and that according to him was the reason for him to believe that everything was over till he received the communication from the Bank on 21.06.2022 where electronically the demand had been raised and the Bank was asked to adjust his demand - Be that as it may, for present, the petitioner is desirous of going to the Appellate Authority for questioning and challenging the assessment which has been finalized and that being his right, if he has missed out on the limitation, condoning this period of limitation in the given circumstance, keeping the larger issue open, this petition is allowed.

  ---

• 2022 (12) TMI 1228 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
  

  Seeking direction to the respondent to release the vehicle and consignment - invalid E-way bill - E-way bill has been generated at 09.56pm at 03.12.2022 at Tiruvannamalai but movement of the vehicle was noticed on 03.12.2022 at 10:56pm at Thoppur Toll. - Section 129(3) of The Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, Tamil Nadu Goods and Services Act, 2017 and Integrated Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 - HELD THAT:- In any event, on a demurrer even if it is construed as 10.56p.m, the question as to whether the vehicle could have crossed Thoppur Toll within one hour of declaration of e-way bill are all matters turning on facts. Section 129 provides for issue of notice / hearing before order is made. This Court is informed that notice has been issued on 04.12.2022. The order has to be made within 7 days but owing to the captioned writ petition being filed on 09.12.2022, making of the order has been put on hold is learned Revenue counsel's say.

  This is not a fit case for interfering with the impugned notice. Let the petitioner respond to 04.12.2022 notice, let the respondent consider the same on its own merits and in accordance with law after affording an opportunity to the writ petitioner as per Section 129(3) of C-G &ST Act. Though obvious, it is made clear that if the order is adverse to the writ petitioner, it is open to the writ petitioner to assail the same in a manner known to law - Petition dismissed.

  ---

• 2022 (12) TMI 1227 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
  

  Condonation of delay in filing appeal - three months prescribed period and one month condonable period vide Section 107 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 elapsed within Covid-19 period - HELD THAT:- In identical circumstances, this Court had penned a judgment in THE GENERAL MANAGER SOUTHERN RAILWAY HEAD QUARTERS OFFICE PARK TOWN CHENNAI AND THE CHIEF ENGINEER/CENTRAL (CONSTRUCTION) N SOUTHERN RAILWAY PERIYAR E.V.R. HIGH ROAD EGMORE CHENNAI VERSUS EAGLE-OMEGA AND KR AND CO. (JV) REPRESENTED BY ITS LEAD PARTNER MR. C. KARNAN [2020 (10) TMI 1348 - MADRAS HIGH COURT] wherein delay in filing an application under Section 34 of The Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 left the protagonist of a Section 34 high and dry.

  Hon'ble Supreme Court has made it clear that what was extended by order of Hon'ble Supreme Court qua Covid-19 period was only the period of limitation and not the period upto which the delay can be condoned in exercise of discretion conferred by the Statute. Therefore, this Court in the light of the authoritative pronouncement of Hon'ble Supreme Court, finds no grounds to interfere with the order of the first respondent.

  The argument that impugned order returns a finding in favour of writ petitioner but does not grant relief owing to limitation bar is no argument as law is well settled that when limitation elapses right is not extinguished but remedy is barred.

  Petition dismissed.

  ---

• 2022 (12) TMI 1226 - PATNA HIGH COURT
  

  Maintainability of petition - availability of alternative remedy - fair opportunity of hearing - ex-parte order - violation of principles of natural justice - HELD THAT:- This Court, notwithstanding the statutory remedy, is not precluded from interfering where, ex facie, we form an opinion that the order is bad in law. This we say so, for two reasons - (a) violation of principles of natural justice, i.e. fair opportunity of hearing. No sufficient time was afforded to the petitioner to represent his case and (b) order passed ex parte in nature, does not assign any reasons sufficient even decipherable from the record, as to how the officer could determine the amount due and payable by the assessee. The order, ex parte in nature, passed in violation of the principles of natural justice, entails civil consequences.

  The instant petition sands disposed of.

  ---

• 2022 (12) TMI 1177 - JHARKHAND HIGH COURT
  

  Maintainability of the writ petition - Availability of efficacious remedy of appeal - dispute pertains to questions of fact - seeking direction upon the respondents to show cause as to how an Officer of the State Taxes could carry out the proceedings under Section 129 of CGST Act - HELD THAT:- Having heard learned counsel for the parties and after going through the series of events, as also, taking into consideration that an efficacious alternative remedy by way of appeal is available to the petitioner under Section 107 of JGST Act, we therefore, grant liberty to the petitioner to approach the appellate authority against the impugned order passed under Form GST MOV 09. On his approaching, the State Taxes Officer, Intelligence Bureau, Jamshedpur Division, Jamshedpur shall provide the GSTIN number so that the petitioner can prefer an appeal online.

  The writ petition is disposed of.

  ---

• 2022 (12) TMI 1176 - JHARKHAND HIGH COURT
  

  Maintainability of the writ petition - Availability of efficacious remedy of appeal - dispute pertains to questions of fact - seeking direction upon the respondents to show cause as to how an Officer of the State Taxes could carry out the proceedings under Section 129 of CGST Act - HELD THAT:- Having heard learned counsel for the parties and after going through the series of events, as also, taking into consideration that an efficacious alternative remedy by way of appeal is available to the petitioner under Section 107 of JGST Act, we therefore, grant liberty to the petitioner to approach the appellate authority against the impugned order passed under Form GST MOV 09. On his approaching, the State Taxes Officer, Intelligence Bureau, Jamshedpur Division, Jamshedpur shall provide the GSTIN number so that the petitioner can prefer an appeal online.

  The writ petition is disposed of.

  ---

123456........ 97