GST Daily
Dear Reader,
Welcome to Taxmann.com | Newsletter – Reporting the Facts with Taxmann's Analysis. Today's Edition Brings to You Comprehensive Coverage of GST Case Laws | Statutory Updates | Analysis
HC directed assessee to respond to only those issues of fresh SCN which weren't already decided in previous adjudication order
The petitioner was engaged in the business of manufacturing and trading of plastic products. The department issued a show cause notice (SCN) to the petitioner to explain the reasons for difference in output tax liability as between GSTR-1 and GSTR-3B returns. It filed writ petition against the SCN and contended that the issue raised in the SCN was already subject of earlier adjudication order.
The Honorable High Court noted that the earlier order was in operation and the department issued another SCN against petitioner in respect of three issues, including reconciliation of GSTR-1 and GSTR-3B. The Court further noted that the issue in impugned SCN was same issue which was determined under earlier order. Undoubtedly, it was not open to department to reopen same issue after issuing earlier order.
Therefore, the Court directed the petitioner to respond to SCN only insofar as it pertained to issues of declaration of ineligible ITC and invalid ITC under Section 16(4) and as regards to issue relating to reconciliation of GSTR-1 and GSTR-3B, the impugned SCN would be set aside.
HC dismissed writ challenging Notification No. 53/2023-CT which denied appeal in respect of demand not involving tax
The petitioner filed refund application for unutilized ITC of GST paid on coal. The department issued show cause notice on ground that supply of electricity to township was a non-business activity. The order was passed and a portion of refund was rejected. The petitioner received said order after a period of more than one year had passed.
It filed appeal against the order but the same was rejected on ground of limitation. It filed writ petition and challenging Notification No. 53/2023-CT which provided that no appeal under this notification shall be admissible in respect of a demand not involving tax.
The Honorable High Court noted that the petitioner filed appeal after a delay of 1 year 1 month and no cogent reason was afforded for such an inordinate delay. The appeal filed by the petitioner was barred by limitation and it was not in a position to avail the benefit of the extension of the time period granted by the Notification No. 53/2023-CT.
Further, the Court also noted that no cogent reason was assigned as to how clause 5 of impugned notification was ultra vires to Constitution of India. Therefore, the Court held that the relief sought by petitioner to declare clause 5 of impugned notification as ultra vires shall not be accepted and the writ petition was dismissed.
That's it from us for today!
We're keen on enhancing Your Taxmann.com | Newsletter Experience and would greatly value your input. Your feedback is pivotal in guiding our improvements. Could you spare a few moments to share your thoughts in the comments on how we might better serve your needs?
Taxmann.com | Research | GST – Largest Database Redefined
About:
The GST repository features an AI-based search engine designed to recreate and simplify the way you conduct your research—a combination of features that are impeccably specified and tied by a common thread.
? 71,000+ Case Laws with Integration and Headnotes/Case-Digest
? Authentic, Amended & Updated 35+Acts/40+Rules with Annotations & Integration
? 345+ Forms Updated in real-time
? 26,000+ Circulars & Notifications
? 'Notifications in Force' tool for a list of currently effective Notifications
? 'Historical Tariff' tool for checking rates at different periods
? Expert Discourse Hub Featuring 10+ Commentaries and 3200+ Articles
? 22,000+ Answers to Your Practical GST Queries from V.S. Datey et al.
? Real-Time Intelligence Feed that Reports from 1,000+ Authentic Sources
Subscribe Now and Transform the Way You Work! https://taxmann.social/BuGXf