- 2022 (5) TMI 968
Levy of IGST - Ocean Freight - scope of supply - composite supply or not - time and place of supply - whether an Indian importer can be subject to the levy of IGST on the component of ocean freight paid by the foreign seller to a foreign shipping line, on a reverse charge basis? - Scope and power of state legislature versus GST Council - HELD THAT:- The provisions of composite supply in the CGST Act (and the IGST Act) play a specific role in the levy of GST. The idea of introducing ‘composite supply’ was to ensure that various elements of a transaction are not dissected and the levy is imposed on the bundle of supplies altogether. This finds specific mention in the illustration provided under Section 2(30) of CGST Act, where the principal supply is that of goods. Thus, the intent of the Parliament was that a transaction which ....... + More
- 2022 (5) TMI 292
Seeking grant of Bail - offences punishable under Sections 132/134 of the Central Goods and Services Tax, 2017 - amount of Rs.4 Crores has been deposited with the concerned authorities and the appellant has been enjoying the facility of ad-interim bail - HELD THAT:- The appellant shall continue to be on bail on the same conditions on which he was allowed the facility of ad-interim bail. The security and documents of surety furnished at that stage shall continue to be operative as conditions of bail - appeal allowed.
- 2022 (4) TMI 980
Grant of interest / compensation for delayed Refund of unutilized input tax credit - Rate of interest - HC awarded 9% instead of 6% applying the proviso to section 56 - zero rated supply - export of goods - Section 54 r.w.section 56 of the CGST Act - HELD THAT:- A registered person making export of goods outside India, is entitled in terms of Section 16 of the IGST Act to claim refund of either unutilized input tax credit of export of goods under bond or letter of undertaking or refund of integrated tax paid on export of goods. In terms of Section 20 of the IGST Act, any claim for refund is to be governed by the provisions of the CGST Act which would apply mutatis mutandis as if they were enacted in the IGST Act. The application for refund, therefore, is required to be preferred in accordance with Section 54 of the CGST Act. According to ....... + More
- 2022 (2) TMI 351
Seeking grant of Bail - Evasion of GST - question mark on the conduct of the officers who performed the search operations - HELD THAT:- The appellant cannot be indefinitely detained in custody more so having already undergone a period of 25 months of custody when he can be sent behind bars for maximum five years. It is almost 50% of the sentence. The stand of the respondent was also coloured by the proceedings taken out by the appellant/family members qua the conduct of the officers which has visited them with some adverse consequences though certain proceedings are still pending qua the same. Bail granted to the appellant on terms and conditions to the satisfaction of the Trial Court - appeal allowed.
- 2022 (1) TMI 1168
Seeking direction to the respondent(s) to transfer the investigation pertaining to Summons pending at Delhi to the Directorate General of GST Intelligence, Surat Zonal Unit, Gujarat - another case against the petitioner is being investigated by the Surat Zonal Unit - HELD THAT:- The respondents have filed a detailed reply affidavit and have asserted that two investigations pertain to different causes of action. If so, it is for the investigating Agency to decide whether it would like to have a joint investigation pertaining to the petitioner. No writ of mandamus need be issued in that behalf in light of the factual assertion in the counter affidavit. This writ petition is disposed of.
- 2021 (12) TMI 840
Validity of Circular issued by the CBIC - Jurisdiction - Form GSTR-3B is return or not - imposition on rectification of Form GSTR-3B in respect of the period in which the error had occurred - HELD THAT:- The judgement of the High Court has been expressly overruled by a three-Judge Bench decision of this Court in Civil Appeal [2021 (11) TMI 109 - SUPREME COURT] - Learned counsel for the respondent was at pains to persuade us that the three-Judge Bench judgment can be distinguished, without realising that the three-Judge Bench judgment expressly overrules the impugned judgment. - Decided in favor of Revenue.
- 2021 (11) TMI 109
Validity of Circular issued by the CBIC - Jurisdiction - Form GSTR-3B is return or not - imposition on rectification of Form GSTR-3B in respect of the period in which the error had occurred - Circular No. 26/26/2017GST dated 29.12.2017 - jurisdiction of the Delhi High Court to entertain the writ petition - writ petition suffered from the vice of nonjoinder of the necessary parties including that the High Court could not have issued a writ of mandamus - HELD THAT:- The writ petitioner was not challenging the individual action of the States or the Union Territories, but a policy decision of the Central authority who had issued the impugned Circular, namely, the Commissioner (GST). If the writ petitioner succeeded in that challenge, the consequential relief would follow. Nonimpleadment of respective States/Union Territori....... + More
- 2021 (9) TMI 626
Refund of unutilised ITC on input services - challenge to validity of Rule 89(5) on the ground that it is ultra vires Section 54(3)(ii) - interpretation of sub-Section (3) to Section 54 and Explanation 1 to sub-Section (1) of Section 54 - HELD THAT:- Parliament while enacting sub-Section (3) of Section 54 has stipulated that no refund of unutilized ITC shall be allowed other than in the two specific situations envisaged in clauses (i) and (ii) of the first proviso. Whereas clause (i) has dealt with zero rated supplies made without the payment of tax, clause (ii), which governs domestic supplies, has envisaged a more restricted ambit where the credit has accumulated on account of the rate of tax on inputs being higher than the rate of tax on output supplies. While the CGST Act defines the expression ‘input’ in Section 2(59) by ....... + More
- 2021 (9) TMI 480
Maintainability of petition - availability of alternative remedy of appeal - Refund of the amount collected towards tax and penalty together with interest - inter-State sale - sale of goods in the local market by evading SGST and CGST - violation of principles of natural justice - HELD THAT:- The respondent had a statutory remedy under section 107. Instead of availing of the remedy, the respondent instituted a petition under Article 226. The existence of an alternate remedy is not an absolute bar to the maintainability of a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution. A writ petition can be entertained in exceptional circumstances where there is: (i) a breach of fundamental rights; (ii) a violation of the principles of natural justice; (iii) an excess of jurisdiction; or (iv) a challenge to the vires of the statute or delegated le....... + More
- 2021 (9) TMI 94
Maintainability of SLP - availability of alternative remedy of appeal - HELD THAT:- Since an appeal lies under Section 107 of the UP GST Act against the order of assessment, we are not entertaining the Special Leave Petition under Article 136 of the Constitution. SLP dismissed.
- 2021 (8) TMI 1076
Rate of GST - course fee payable by candidates for the DNB course conducted under the auspices of the National Board of Examinations - enhancement in the quantum of fee - applied to all ongoing broad specialty, special specialty and fellowship courses, irrespective of the year of joining or not - HELD THAT:- Issue notice, returnable on 3 September 2021. Since an application for interim relief is made on behalf of the petitioners, further proceedings directed to be listed on 3 September 2021.
- 2021 (8) TMI 554
Maintainability of petition - HELD THAT:- The Writ Petitions are, accordingly, dismissed with costs of ₹ 50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand) in each case, to be paid to the Supreme Court Legal Services Committee within two weeks from today. SLP dismissed.
- 2021 (4) TMI 837
Maintainability of writ petition before the High Court - Provisional attachment - Section 83 of the HPGST Act - valid exercise of power or not - HELD THAT:- it is evident that the expression ‘adjudicating authority’ does not include among other authorities, the Commissioner. In the present case, the narration of facts indicates that on 21 October 2020, the Commissioner had in exercise of his powers under Section 5(3) made a delegation inter alia to the Joint Commissioner of State Taxes and Excise in respect of the powers vested under Section 83(1). The Joint Commissioner, in other words, was exercising the powers which are vested in the Commissioner under Section 83(1) to order a provisional attachment in pursuance of the delegation exercised on 21 October 2020. This being the position, clearly the order passed by the Joint Co....... + More
- 2021 (3) TMI 1213
Seeking extension of Amnesty Scheme - cap on the late fees to be collected - exemption from the payment of late fees between 25 March 2020 and 30 June 2020 - refund of amounts calculated - HELD THAT:- The Amnesty Scheme itself lies in the realm of a policy intervention by the Union Government. The terms on which the Amnesty has been granted are hence matters of policy. There are no merit in the petition. Petition dismissed.
- 2021 (1) TMI 302
Powers of inspection, search, seizure and arrest - penalties and prosecution - validity of section 69 &132, section 70(1), section 67(1) and 69, Section 137 and section 135 of GST - right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution - HELD THAT:- The petitioners have an efficacious remedy in the form of proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution to challenge the constitutional validity of the provisions of the statute which are placed in issue. Following this course of action is desirable, for this Court will then have the benefit of a considered view emanating from the High Court. Though the Counsel for the petitioners invokes Article 21, this is a case involving essentially a challenge to revenue legislation. Undoubtedly, the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 32 is a salutary constitutional safeguard to protect the fun....... + More
- 2020 (12) TMI 140
Levy of tax on lotteries - legality of definition of goods under Section 2(52) of Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and consequential notifications to the extent it levies tax on lotteries - petitioner seeks declaration that the levy of tax on lottery is discriminatory and violative of Articles 14, 19(1)(g), 301 and 304 of the Constitution of India. Whether the writ petition is not maintainable under Article 32 of the Constitution of India since the writ petition relates to lottery, which is res extra commercium and the petitioner cannot claim protection under Article 19(1)(g)? - HELD THAT:- The writ petition alleging the violation of Article 14 specially with respect to a parliamentary Act can very well be entertained under Article 32. Also, with regard to the matter of lottery itself, this Court had entertained a writ petition ea....... + More
- 2020 (9) TMI 1175
Permission for withdrawal of SLP - the petitioner seeks permission to withdraw the petition - HELD THAT:- The Special Leave Petition is dismissed as withdrawn.
- 2020 (8) TMI 831
Applications seeking exemption from filing notarized affidavit and welfare stamp in both the matters are allowed. Issue notice - No coercive steps shall be taken against the petitioners by way of arrest in the meanwhile.
- 2020 (2) TMI 1188
Anti-profiteering measure - Constitutional validity of Section 171 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act 2017 read with Rule 126 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules 2017 - time limitation - HELD THAT:- It is considered appropriate and proper that, in the interests of a uniform and consistent view on the law, all the writ petitions should be transferred to the High Court of Delhi, where earlier writ petitions are already pending.
- 2020 (1) TMI 1576
Jurisdiction - appellant seeks to contend that the Officer who carries out an audit should not be the Officer who passes an assessment order - HELD THAT:- In the absence of assistance from the respondent-department and taking into account the aforesaid pleas, as also the fact that in terms of the Order dated 27.09.2019, the matter is remitted back to the High Court except on the question whether the Audit Officer can also pass an assessment order or not, it is deemed appropriate to remit this issue also to the High Court. It is stated that the matter is to be listed on 21.5.2020 in the High Court. Appeal disposed off.
