Chartered Accountant
Bookmark and Share
click here to subscribe our newsletter
 
 
Corporate News *  Missing seized records must be considered while testing ITC claim; duplicate GST demands ordered corrected: Delhi High Court. *  GST appeal can’t be rejected without addressing taxpayer’s grounds: Allahabad High Court. *  Surplus IGST credit can offset CGST, SGST shortfall: GSTAT. *  GST refund can’t be denied when cancelled airfares are returned with tax: GSTAT. *  3 Hearing notices issued within 2 minutes: Gujarat High Court flags portal flaw, seeks report. *  GSTR-9, GSTR-9C filing for FY 2025-26 enabled; pending GSTR-1 and GSTR-3B must be filed first. *  Dupattas are exempt fabrics, can’t be taxed as fibres at 4%: Madras High Court. *  Full transitional credit allowed on capital goods received after GST rollout: GSTAT denies Rs. 6.99 lakh export duty credit. *  GST return mismatch alone can’t justify fraud proceedings: GSTAT orders fresh adjudication under section 73. *  Supplier found non-existent later can’t alone justify input tax credit denial: GSTAT. *  GST interest stops once tax reaches government account, can’t run until return filing: GSTAT. *  Cancelled flat booking- GST refund can’t be denied without excluding COVID period from limitation: GSTAT. *  India notifies rules of origin for India–New Zealand FTA. *  Incomplete E-bike kits classifiable as complete vehicles, but not eligible for CKD duty concession: CESTAT. *  Same GST rate on main input and output can’t by itself bar inverted duty refund: GSTAT. *  Unjust enrichment doesn’t apply to customs refunds from assessments finalised before July 13, 2006: Gujarat High Court. *  CENVAT credit can’t be denied solely because plant And machinery are embedded in earth: Karnataka High Court. *  DFIA exports ineligible for RoDTEP benefits; customs directs repayment with applicable interest. *  Second E-Way bill alone doesn’t prove another supply: GSTAT. *  Bail denied in Rs. 1.19 crore fake GST refund case over risk of accused absconding again: Punjab and Haryana High Court. *  GST registration can be restored after revocation deadline if outstanding dues are paid: Gauhati High Court. *  Multiple GST proceedings over same suppliers: Calcutta High Court directs dept. to share findings for adjudication. *  E-Governance portal services not OIDAR, fixed deposit interest not taxable: CESTAT. *  Rs. 500 Stamp duty required on authority letters for CAs, CMA and GST practitioners in Pune GST division.  *  Rs. 1.10 crore GST refund must be paid in cash after business closure: Allahabad High Court. *  Godown rent attracts 18% GST even when used exclusively for exempt agricultural warehousing: AAR. *  GST portal launches "Multi-State Registration" facility: one master TRN for registration applications across multiple States/UTs. *  RoDTEP scheme extended till 31st December, 2026.  *  Mere disagreement with order can’t override Rs. 20 lakh appeal limit: GSTAT. *  Customs interest can’t be backdated before confiscation liability is determined; nearly 8 year period excluded: Delhi High Court.
Subject News *  GST summons: anticipatory bail maintainable without arrest order, but relief denied in evasion case: Allahabad High Court. *  GST Appeal can’t be decided without hearing taxpayer’s objections to fresh evidence: Allahabad High Court. *  GST ITC can’t be reversed merely because supplier grants discount without reducing tax liability: GSTAT. *  Mere quoting of GST provision is not a valid charge: GSTAT quashes ITC denial. *  Personal hearing mandatory before adverse GST order, even without taxpayer’s request: Rajasthan High Court. *  Parallel bail pleas without full disclosure amount to abuse of process Rs. 43.08 crore GST case sent for fresh hearing: Supreme Court. *  GST refund based on unchallenged advance ruling can’t be recovered using later circular: GSTAT. *  Payment of GST alone doesn’t end interest and penalty liability when tax and interest remain unpaid beyond 30 days of notice: GSTAT. *  GST demand over builders’ 80% procurement rule requires reasoned adjudication: GSTAT. *  Eligible ITC doesn’t automatically entitle taxpayers to compensation cess refund on domestic sales: GSTAT. *  GST confiscation order passed before reply deadline invalid: GSTAT. *  GST interest can’t be retained after tax refund on delayed export receipts: Punjab & Haryana High Court. *  GST appeal can’t be dismissed over pre-deposit shortfall without opportunity To respond: Bombay High Court. *  DGGI SCN can’t be challenged before reply and adjudication:Chhattisgarh High Court. *  GST input tax credit can’t be denied solely due to supplier’s retrospective registration cancellation: GSTAT. *  GST notice must explain fraud allegations; merely repeating section 74 Is not enough:  Himachal Pradesh High Court. *  Audit detection alone can’t justify GST fraud penalty; specific suppression must be proved: GSTAT. *  GST order uploaded only under ‘Additional Notices’ tab without separate intimation set aside: Calcutta High Court. *  Service Tax appeal can’t be rejected for missing pre-deposit proof when payment is already recorded: CESTAT. *  SGST dept. can’t hear appeal against CGST order: Calcutta High Court. *  Mere dispatch of tax order can’t prove service or make appeal time-barred: CESTAT. *  Dealer incentives can’t be taxed merely on ledger entries: CESTAT. *  DGFT orders quashed for failure to supply DRI letter relied upon in SCN: Bombay High Court. *  GST penalty u/s 122(1A) can’t apply to Pre-2021 transactions; unregistered beneficiaries also covered: Delhi High Court. *  Expired E-way bill caused by wrong PIN code can’t justify GST penalty without intent to evade tax: GSTAT. *  Used railway rails can’t be taxed as track material without proof they are fit for reuse: CESTAT. *  Earlier DGGI notice doesn’t bar separate GST demand on different issue: Delhi High Court. *  ITC dispute involves no question of law: GSTAT directs appeal to Vice-President. *  Earlier DGGI notice doesn’t bar separate GST demand On different issue: Delhi High Court. *  No E-way bill required for interstate goods movement in november 2017: GSTAT quashes detention and penalty.  

Comments

Print   |    |  Comment

12771GST UPDATE ON POWER OF HIGH COURT IN CASE OF DECISION BY AAAR

12771GST UPDATE ON POWER OF HIGH COURT IN CASE OF DECISION BY AAAR
GST law allows a taxpayer to apply for an advance ruling to obtain clarifications from the Authority for Advance Ruling (‘AAR’). If the taxpayer or the Revenue Authority is aggrieved by the order passed by the AAR, they have an option to file an appeal before the Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling (‘AAAR’). The ruling pronounced by AAR / AAAR is binding on all such parties. However, no further remedy by way of an appeal is provided under the GST law against the order of AAAR. Can an assessee file writ petition against the order of AAAR?
The same matter was discussed in the case of JSW energy ltd by Bombay High court where assessee has filed writ petition to HC against the order of AAAR. The HC has declined the examination of the case on the basis of merits because there is no provision under GST to appeal against the order of AAAR. The case was remanded back to the AAAR for the fresh consideration on the basis of merits. Supreme Court in the case of Smt. Sudha Patil also took the similar view that in case no appellate provision are given in the law it does not enlarge the power of High Court to exercise an appellate power.
Assessee can apply to the writ petition in HC in the exceptional cases like where principle of natural justice is not followed or assessee is challenging the constitutional validity of a provision. Moreover, in the cases where AAAR does not follow proper decision-making process, the court can refer back case to AAAR without examining the case on basis of merits as the same was held in case of C.M.S. Info Systems Ltd.
Decision of AAR is final and binding on the assessee and concerned departmental officers till the time there are changes in law, facts and circumstances supporting the advance ruling. This is clearly given in Sectio 103(2) of CGST Act, 2017. In case of changes in law, facts etc after ruling by AAR/AAAR the binding nature of ruling comes to an end but if circular in issued in subject matter after the AAR ruling than it will not affect the AAR ruling because circulars are not considered as change in law and they are only binding on department.
From the above reference to the case laws, it is clear that decision of the AAR final or binding and the Court may not accept the petitions challenging the AAAR ruling. It can be said that the order passed by the AAAR cannot be challenged in the High Court under GST law. It can only be challenged in case the AAAR goes beyond its jurisdictional limits or breach of principles of natural justice or committing errors of law or constitutional validity of a provision is being challenged.
Moreover, we have seen that the CBIC has many times given a clarification by way of circular over an issue where AAR has given verdict. One example can be of salary paid to directors. Advance Ruling of Rajasthan said in case of Clay Craft India Private Limited that GST is payable on the same but the CBIC has clarified vide circular number 140/10/2020 – GST dated June 10, 2020contrary to the same. Such type of situations arise in many cases.
But the circular cannot be said to be amendment in law or facts. Hence, these are not binding. It leads to peculiar situation where all taxpayers are taking benefit of CBIC circular which is against the appellant. The applicant who has sought advance ruling has to follow it as per provision of Section 103 of CGST Act ibid. He cannot even go to High Court as per above referred decisions. But some advocates are of the opinion that above advance ruling can be challenged on the basis of discrimination.
These all difficulties are attached with Advance Ruling. But the pro-revenue approach of departmental officers appointed in Advance Ruling has given a signal to taxpayers not to approach advance ruling. To save this authority, trade and industry should demand national level authority of advance ruling. Secondly, it should also be demanded that judicial member should be appointed so that confidence of taxpayers is restored in Advance Ruling authority.  
Department News


Query

 
PRADEEP JAIN, F.C.A.

Head Office : -

Address :
"SUGYAN", H - 29, SHASTRI NAGAR, JODHPUR (RAJ.) - 342003

Phone No. :
0291 - 2439496, 0291 - 3258496

Mobile No. :
09314722236

Fax No. :0291 - 2439496


Branch Office : -

Address:
1008, 10th FLOOR, SUKH SAGAR COMPLEX,
NEAR FORTUNE LANDMARK HOTEL, USMANPURA,
ASHRAM ROAD, AHMEDABAD-380013

Phone No. :
079-32999496, 27560043

Mobile No. :
093777659496, 09377649496

E-mail :pradeep@capradeepjain.com