RECENT ADVANCE RULINGS UNDER GST AND JUDICIAL DECISIONS ON INDIRECT TAXES AND OTHERS

A .RECENT ADVANCE RULINGS UNDER GST

Statute: Goods and Services Tax
Decision in Favour of: NOT APPLICABLE
Title: M/S SREE SUBHA SALES
Citation:ADVANCE RULING NO. KAR ADRG 39/ 2022      DATED: 27.10.2022
Bench/Court: Karnataka Authority for Advance Ruling

The Applicant is a Partnership concern registered under the provisions of Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 as well as Karnataka Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (hereinafter referred to as the CGST Act and KGST/SGST Act respectively). The
Applicant states that they execute government projects on tender basis and their main area of expertise is water supply and underground drainage works.
The applicant has sought advance ruling in respect of the following questions: Applicability of GST for reimbursement of tree cut compensation and land amount paid to farmers and land owners during the course of execution of work.
The applicant states that as per the agreement entered between them and KPTCL, the work order amount does not include the compensation amount paid to farmers. It is being paid as mere reimbursement. Applicant states that regarding this they have obtained clarification from the finance advisor of KPTCL that, this transaction does not attract GST. 
The applicant states that the amount is being paid as compensation to the affected as per detailed work award. Tree cutting, tree cut compensation, crop compensation would be arranged to he paid by the contractor. The owner shall render necessary help for fixing the compensation through horticulture / agriculture department. The compensation charges so paid shall be reimbursed separately by the owner as per actuals. Accordingly the compensation amount is paid and reimbursement as per actuals is received from KPTCL.
As per the findings, At the outset we would like to make it clear that the provisions of CGST Act, 2017 and the KGST Act, 2017 are in pari-materia and have the same provisions in
like matter and differ from each other only on a few specific provisions. Therefore, unless a mention is particularly made to such dissimilar provisions, a reference to the CGST Act would also mean reference to the corresponding similar provisions in the KGST Act.
It could be seen that a pure agent would be a person (supplier i.e. applicant in this case) who enters into a contractual agreement with the recipient of supply (KPTCL in this case) to act as recipient’s pure agent to incur expenditure or costs, in the course of supply of goods or services or both. It is an admitted fact that the applicant herein is raising reimbursement bill for the compensation (tree cut compensation/ crop compensation) paid to farmers once the cheques issued by the applicant to the farmers are realized in the bank. Now we proceed to examine whether the applicant falls into the category of “Pure Agent” as per the explanation given under Rule 33 of CGST Rules 2017 mentioned supra.
This document can be considered as the agreement with KPTCL to act as his pure agent to incur expenditure or costs in the course of supply of goods or services, assuming that, this document (Special conditions of Contract) is a part of the main agreement .However, of _Special Conditions of Contract’ does’ not mention anything about land compensation. Thus the first condition to be a pure agent is satisfied only to the extent of Tree cut compensation and crop compensation.
The Applicant states that land compensation is paid to the land owner on whose land the express feeder line passes and to any land within 9 meter vicinity on either side of the express feeder line since there should not be any trees, plants or structures
within the 9 meter vicinity of the express feeder line as per norms. Where it is inevitable to cut the crops and trees during the course of execution of project, crop compensation
and tree cut compensation is paid to the farmers. Thus the farmers or land owners are paid compensation either for cutting the trees or crops grown in their land or for not
growing any trees or crops or to build any structures below the express feeder line. This is the service supplied by the farmers or land owners to the KPTCL and the same is covered under schedule II of CGST Act 2017.
The Applicant states that they pay land compensation, tree cut compensation and crop compensation to farmers or land owners as mentioned supra. The Applicant states that as per section V - Special conditions of contract mentioned supra, tree cut compensation, crop compensation would be paid~ by the contractor and then the same is reimbursed by the owner as per actuals. Thus the fourth condition to be a pure agent is satisfied.
The Applicant is acting as a pure agent only to the extent of reimbursement of tree cut compensation. But the Applicant is not acting as pure agent to the extent of reimbursement of land as of Special conditions of contract does not mention land i.e there is no contractual agreement with the recipient of supply to act as his pure agent to incur expenditure or costs in the course of supply of services to the extent of land compensation. However, in case if Special conditions of contract is not a part of the main agreement, then Advance Ruling issued in this case does not apply.
As per the ruling , reimbursement of tree cut compensation amount paid to farmers and land owner during the course of execution of work is not chargeable to GST as the Applicant qualifies to be a Pure Agent and Reimbursement of land compensation amount paid to farmers and land owners during the course of execution of work is chargeable to GST as the Applicant does not qualifies to be a Pure Agent.

Statute: GOODS AND SERVICES TAX
Decision in Favour of: NOT APPLICABLE
Title:  M/S.innovative Nutrichem Pvt. Ltd.
Citation: Advance Ruling No. KAR ADRO 37/2022         DATED 27-10-2022
Bench/Court:Karnataka Authority for advance rulings  

The applicant stated that they are registered under GST and are into the business of manufacture and supply of animal feeds, which are exempted goods under GST, for which they utilize the GTA / Security Services that are covered under Reverse Charge Mechanism (RCM).

The applicant has sought advance ruling in respect of the following questions: Whether they are liable to pay GST under RCM for the services procured from the respective service providers being the manufacturer and supplier of exempted goods falling under HSN 23099020.

The applicant furnished the facts relevant to the issue that they are the manufacturer and supplier of animal feeds, classifiable under HSN 23099020, which are exempted from GST vide entry No.102 of the Notification No.02/2017-Central Tax (Rate) dated 28.06.2017; they use the services of Goods Transport Agencies (GTA) to transport their products/goods and pay the freight/transportation charges to the transport operators; GTA services fall under Reverse Charge Mechanism (RCM) vide entry No.01 of the Notification No.13/2017- Central Tax (Rate) dated 28.06.2017; they also use the security services, which also fall under RCM vide entry No.14 of the Notification No.13/2017-Central Tax (Rate) dated 28.06.2017, as amended vide notification No.29/2018-Central Tax (Rate) dated 31.12.2018.
The applicant contends that they supply animal feeds (exempted goods) and hence the Reverse Charge Mechanism Notification No.13/2017 dated 28.06.2017 is not applicable to them.

In view of this the applicant sought advance ruling in respect of the question as to whether they are liable to pay GST under RCM on the GTA & Security services utilized as their outward supply is exempted. In this regard we invite reference to Section 9 of the CGST Act 2017, more specifically to Section 9(1) and9(3) of the Act, ibid.
“Levy and collection (1) :Subject to the provisions of sub-section (2), there shall be levied a tax called the central goods and services tax on all intra-State supplies of goods or services or ~both, except on the supply of alcoholic liquor for human consumption, on the value determined under section 15 and at such rates, not exceeding twenty per cent., as may be notified by the Government on the recommendations of the Council and collected in such manner as may be prescribed and shall be paid by the taxable person. (3) The Government may, on the recommendations of the Council, by notification, specify categories of supply of goods or services or both, the tax on which shall be paid on reverse charge basis by the recipient of such goods or services or both and all the provisions of this Act shall apply to such recipient as if he is the person liable for paying the tax in relation to the supply of such goods or services or both.”
The applicant, admittedly is a registered person under GST Act and located in the taxable territory. They are the recipients of the services of the Goods Transport Agency and Security services, which are squarely covered under the category of supplies attracting GST liabilities on reverse charge basis, in terms of the Notification supra. Further Section 9(3) of the CGST Act 2017 stipulates that all the provisions of the CGST Ad 2017 shall apply to the recipient as If he is the person liable for paying the tax in relation to the supply of such goods or Services or both, where the tax shall be paid on reverse charge basis by the recipient. Thus the recipient of service is liable to pay GST in respect of the services notified under Section 9(3) of the Act, ibid read with Notification 13|2017-Central Tax(Rate). It is pertinent to mention that GST is levied on the supply of service and liability is fastened independently for each of the supplies. Levy of tax or otherwise on a particular supply does not have a bearing on the taxability of other supplies received or provided by a taxpayer. Thus the exemption provided to the outward supplies of the applicant does not have a bearing on the GST liabilities under reverse charge basis on the supplies received by the applicant.
As per the ruling, the applicant is liable to pay GST under RCM, for the services notified and covered under RCM, received from the service providers, in spite of being a manufacturer and supplier of exempted goods falling under HSN 2309 90 20.

Statute: GOODS AND SERVICE TAX
Decision in Favour of: NOT APPLICABLE
Title: M/S DAS AND SONS
Citation:ORDER NO.03/ODISI R/2022-23
DATED 23-08-2022
Bench/Court: Odisha authority for advance ruling    

The Applicant having its principal place of business at Mochinda, Salbani, Odisha bearing GSTIN 21ALZPD6O41Q1ZM is engaged in manufacturing of “Rania Gundi” (Chewable Gundi- its final product) & supplying the same to various Betel shops, Grocery shops, Tea shops etc under the cover of GST invoices.
The applicant has stated following questions: 1)What will be the HSN code for the final product?What will be the applicable tax rate & cess rate of the said product?
As per the Applicant, the product “Rania Gundi” is prepared in the following manners: a)Tobacco dust is added with lime and Mustard oil and mixed properly. b)After being mixed, other ingredients like Dhania, Pan madhuri , Mala zira, Epoil, cinnamon and clove are added in the mixture to prepare the final product- Raula Gundi.
The Applicant packs the final product in 5OOgm pkt, lOOgm pkts, 5Ogm pkts and in packets costing Rs.21/- and sells them in the market as well as to retail shops. Based on the aforesaid submission, the Applicant has requested the Honourable Authority for Advance Ruling (AAR) to kindly consider the product “Raula Gundi” to be classified under HSN Code 24039920 and the applicable CGST Rate is 28% ( 14%- CGST & 14% SOST) along with CGST Cess @72%.
As per the findings, We, observe that the issue before us is squarely covered under Section 97(2) of the CGST Act, 2017 and therefore we admit the application for consideration. 
The Jurisdictional Deputy Commissioner, CGST & Central Excise, Keonjhar Division vide his letter C.No. IV(16)23/MISCDIV REPORT/KJR/2019/PART-I/4094 dated 26.10.2022 submitted that the product “Rania Oundi” is classifiable under Tariff Heading 24039910 considering the prodominent ingredient i.e. Tobacco involved in the making of the Chewable Gundi ( Raula Gundi) . The JDC is of the opinion that the tax rate of the product “Raula Gundi” which is Chewing Tobacco ( without lime tube) is 28% ( CGST-14% + SGST-14%) and Cess-160%.
The predominant ingredient is Tobacco dust’ which constitutes about 50% of the product and other ingredients are added to it as per required proportion to make it consumable. In the process of manufacturing the product, the raw materials used by the Applicant undergo a set of processes and emerge as _Chewable Tobacco Gundi’ which is marketable/consumable. Therefore, the product prepared and sold by the Applicant is a “Manufactured Tobacco product for chewing”. Once it is held that the product is Manufactured Chewing Tobacco’, the classification of the product is under HSN Code 24039910 which specifies _Chewing Tobacco’ under the head “2403-Other manufactured tobacco”. The very purpose of consuming this combination is that it has both stimulant and relaxation effects, but regular consumption of the same leads to addiction.
Further, as per Notification No.01/2017-_Central Tax (Rate) dated 28.06.2017, the said item appears at Sr. No.15 of Schedule-IV of the said notification [on which GST liability is 28% (14% CGST + 14% SGST). As per Notification No.01/2017-Compensation Cess(Rate) dated 28.06.2017, Chewing Tobacco (without lime tube) appears at SI. No.26 of the said notification (on which Compensation Cess is 160%) . Furthermore, it may be noted that the value for the purpose of GST computation will be the transaction value plus basic excise duty, NCCD and any other amount as prescribed in section 15 of the GST Act, 2017. In this regard, the Applicant is hereby advised to go through the Circular No.1082/03/2022-CX dated 01.02.2022 for Valuation of ‘Tobacco and Tobacco Products’ for the purpose of payment of Basic Excise Duty and National Calamity Contingent Duty (NCCD).
As per the ruling, The final product of the Applicant under the brand name ‘Rania Gundi’ is nothing but “Chewing Tobacco(without lime tube)” and the HSN Code is ‘2403 9910’. The applicable rate of GST on the product is 28% (14% CGST + 14% SGST). The said product also appears at SI.No.26 of Notification No.01/2017- Compensation Cess (Rate) dated 28.06.2017 issued under the CGST Act, 2017 under which Compensation Cess of 160% is leviable on it.

B.JUDICIAL DECISIONS ON  INDIRECT TAXES

Statute: GOODS AND SERVICES TAX
Decision in Favour of: ASSESSEE
Title: Ramji Jaiswal And Another V. State Tax Officer, Bureau Of Investigation (South Bengal), Kharagpur Zone And Others
M.D NIZAMUDDIN J.
Citation: [2023] 108 GSTR 366 (CAL)
Bench/court: In The Calcutta High Court

Goods and Services Tax—Detention of Goods—Penalty—Evasion Of Tax—Interception Of Vehicle And Detention On Ground Of Expiry Of E-Way Bill—Time Gap Between Expiry Of E-Way Bill And Interception Of Vehicle Less Than A Day—Not Case Of Deliberate Or Wilful Intention Of Assessee To Evade Tax Made Out—Assessee Entitled To Refund Of Penalty—West Bengal Goods And Services Tax Act (28 of 2017), s. 129.
 

Statute: GOODS AND SERVICES TAX
Decision in favour of: ASSESSEE
Title: K.d Gupta and Company And Another V. Assistant Commissioner of State Tax, Barrackpore Range and Others
T.S SIVAGNANAM AND SUPRATIM BHATTACHARYA JJ.
Citation: [2023] 108 GSTR 395 (CAL)
Bench/Court: In The Calcutta High Court

Goods And Services Tax—Penalty-Evasion Of Tax —Transaction Claimed To Be Export Transaction, No Tax Was Leviable—Authorities Not Examining Conduct Of Assessee While Imposing Penalty — Writ — One More Opportunity To Be Granted To Assessee To Establish That No Tax Leviable And There Was No Wilful Intention To Evade Payment Of Tax — Orders Of Authorities Set Aside Matter Remanded—West Bengal Goods And Services Tax Act (28 of 2017), s. 129.

Statute: GOODS AND SERVICES TAX
Decision in favour of: ASSESSEE
Title: SEVOKE MOTORS v. STATE Of WEST BENGAL AND OTHERS
HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYA J.
Citation: [2023] 108 GSTR 413 (CAL)
Bench/Court: In The Calcutta High Court

Goods And Services Tax—Input-Tax Credit — Transition Provisions form Relating To “Spares And Accessories” Incorrectly Uploaded Under Table 7(D) Of Tran-1 Instead Of 7(B)— Entitlement Of Assessee To Input-Tax Credit, A Vested Right And Not Be On Account Of Procedural Problems — Writ — Liberty Granted To Assessee To File Individual Tax Credit In Gstr-3b Form August, 2022 And Direction To Authorities To Act On It —Central Goods And Services Tax Act, r. 117.

Statute:  SERVICES TAX
Decision in favour of: ASSESSEE
Title: SHEKHAR RESORTS LIMITED (UNIT HOTEL ORIENT TAJ) v. UNION Of INDIA AND OTHERS
M.R. SHAH AND MRS B.V NAGARATHNA JJ.
Citation: [2023] 108 GSTR 368 (SC)
Bench/Court: IN THE SUPREME COURT Of INDIA 

Service Tax Legacy Dispute Resolution— Inability To Deposit Settlement Dues Under Scheme Within Time Frame Due To Moratorium -Under Insolvency And Bankruptcy Code—Application Seeking Permission To Make Settlement Dues After Lifting Of Moratorium—Not To Be Rejected—Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution ) Scheme, 2019.

Statute: GOODS AND SERVICES TAX 
Decision in favour of: DEPARTMENT
Title: P.K Ores Pvt Ltd. @ Pk Minings Pvt Ltd V. Commissioner Of Sales And Another
Jaswant Singh And Murahari Sri Raman JJ
Citation: [2023] 108 GSTR 457(ORISSA)
Bench/Court: IN THE ORISSA HIGH COURT

Goods and Services Tax—Interest—Self-Assessment Returns —Delay In Payment Of Tax In Terms Of Self-Assessment Returns — Assessee To Pay Tax And Interest Of His Own Accord— Commissioner— Power To Permit Payment In Instalments—No Power To Allow Instalments Where Liability To Be Discharged Is On Account Of Self-Assessed Returns —Odisha Goods And Services( 7 Of 2017), ss. 2(87), 39, 49, 50, 59 —Odisha Goods And Services Rules, 2017, r. 158. 

Statute: GOODS AND SERVICES TAX
Decision in favour of: ASSESSEE
Title: Siliguri Auto Works Private Limited V. Goods And Services Tax Council And Others
HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA J.
Citation: [2023] 108 GSTR 418 (CAL)
Bench/Court: IN THE CALCUTTA HIGH COURT 

Goods And Services Tax—Input-Tax Credit—Transition Provisions—Assessee Correctly Uploading Form Tran-1 In Time But Not Putting Digital Signature Thereon—Entitlement Of Assessee To Input-Tax Credit, A Vested Right And Not Be Denied On Account Of Procedural Problems—Writ—Liberty Granted To Assessee To File Individual Tax Credit in Gstr-3b Form For August, 2022 And Direction To Authorities To Act On It—Central Goods And Services Tax Act (12 Of 2017), s. 140—Central Goods And Services Tax Rules, 2017, r. 117.

Statute: GOODS AND SERVICES TAX
Decision in favour of: ASSESSEE
Title: Assistant Commissioner, State Tax ,Durgapore Range ,West Bengal V. Ashok Kumar Sureka
T.SSivagnanam and Hiranmay Bhattacharyya JJ.
Citation: [2023] 108 GSTR 362 (CAL)
Bench/Court: IN THE CALCUTTA HIGH COURT

Goods And Services Tax—Detention Of Goods—Evasion Of Tax Penalty—E-Way Bill Valid Up To September 9, 2019—Goods To Be Shifted To Place In Durgapur 9 Kilometres Away And Assessee Raising Second E-Way Bill On September 7, 2019 Valid For One Day, I.E., September 7, 2019 To September 8, 2019 (Midnight)—Interception Or Detention Of Vehicle In Absence Of Second E-Way Bill On September 9, 2019 Not Justified—Explanation Of Assessee Acceptable And No Wilful Attempt To Evade Tax—Assessee Entitled To Refund Of Tax And Penalty Paid Under Protest—Central Goods And Services Tax Act (12 of 2017), s. 129.

Statute: CENTRAL SALES TAX
Decision in favour of: DIRECTIONS
Title: Gloster Limted V. Joint Commissioner ,Sales Tax, Large Taxpayers Unit And Others
MD.NIZAMUDDIN J.
Citation: [2023] 108 GSTR 380 (CAL)
BENCH/COURT: IN THE CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
Central Sales Tax—”Second Stage Handling Charges”—Disallowance In Absence Of C And H Forms—Writ—Orders Of Adjudicating, Appellate And Revision Authorities Set Aside And Direction To Consider And Accept C And H Forms Subject To Verification And Consider Issue Of “Second Stage Handling Charges” Afresh—West Bengal Value Added Tax Act (37 of 2003)-Central Sales Tax Act (74 of 1956), s. 9(2).

Statute: VALUE ADDED TAX
Decision in favour of: DEPARTMENT/ASSESSEE
Title: Assistant Commissioner (Ct)(Fac), Park Road Assessment Circle,Erode V. Sunrise Foods Private Ltd
Citation: [2022] 104 GSTR 518 (MAD)
Bench/Court: IN THE MADRAS HIGH COURT

Value Added Tax—Writs Under Constitution—Petition For Quashing Assessment On Ground Of Jurisdiction—Court Remanding Matter To Assessing Authority—Finding Regarding Taxability Of Product Not Required To Be Given At That Stage —Adjudicatory Process Yet To Be Completed—Assessing Officer An Independent Authority And To Take A Decision On Matter Based On Facts And Law—Order And Direction Issued In Writ Petition To Extent Of Remand Sustained—All Other Observations And Findings Vacated —Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act (32 Of 2006), s. 12(2).

Statute:  SALES TAX
Decision in favour of: DEPARTMENT
Om Carrying Corporation And Another V.
State Of Assam And Others
N. Kotiswar Singh C.j And Soumitra Saikia J.
Citation: [2023] 108 GSTR 398 (GAUHATI)
Bench/Court: IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT

Sales Tax—Search And Seizure—Sales Tax Authorities—Jurisdiction—Superintendent Of Taxes—Is Competent To Carry Out Search And Seizure—Not Necessary That He Should Be Designated As Part Of Vigilance Group—In Any Case Materials Recovered In Illegal Search Can Validly Form Basis Of Assessment—Assam General Sales Tax Act (12 of 1993), ss. 2(10), (33), 3(1), 44(3), 46a.

Statute: CUSTOMS DUTY
Decision in favour of: ASSESSEE
Title: RADHESHYAM SPINNING PVT LTD v UNION Of INDIA
J.B.PARDIWALA AND ILESH J VORA JJ
Citation: [2023] 108 GSTR 382 (GUJ)
Bench/Court:IN THE GUJARAT HIGH COURT

Customs Duty—Exemption Notification—Import Of Capital Goods—Change Of Law—Assessee Holding Valid Export Promotion Capital Goods Authorisation— Conditions Complied With— Levy Of Integrated Goods And Services Tax On Import Of Capital Goods—Not Justified-- Assessee Entitled To Refund Of Integrated Goods And Services Tax With Interest—Balance Of Central Goods And Services Tax And State Goods And Services Tax Artific1ally Inflated By Appropriation Of Integrated Goods And Services Credit—Refund To Be Made After Reversing Entries Of Utilisation Of Credit And Debiting Credit Ledger—Customs Act (50 1962), S. 25(1) —Customs Tariff Act (51 Of 1975), S. 3—Central Goods And Services Tax Act (12 Of 2017), Ss. 49, 49b —Central Goods And Services Tax Rules, 2017, R. 88a—Notification No. 26/2017 Customs , Dated April 1, 2015. 2017 Customs, Dated June 29, 2017—Notircation No. 16/2015 Customs Dated April1 2015.

Statute: GOODS AND SERVICES TAX
Decision in favour of: RESPONDENT
Title: Indian Railways Catering & Tourism Corporation(Irctc) Ltd V. Deepak & Co
SANJEEV NARULA J.
Citation: [2022] 104 GSTR 475 (DELHI)
Bench/Court: IN THE DELHI HIGH COURT

Goods And Services Tax—Arbitration-Assessee Licensed By Indian Railway Catering And Tourism Corporation To Provide  Food And Drink On Board Certain Trains—None Of Documents Relating Licensed Catering Services To Be Rendered By Service Provider Mentioning Welcome Drink—Finding Rendered By Arbitrator That For Period Of December 19, 2016 To March 4, 2017 Welcome Drink Provided By Corporation—Fresh Policy Decision Implemented After Licence Came Into Force—No Contractual Stipulation In Tender Document That Specifically Putting Obligation On Assessee To Provide A Welcome Drink—Corporation Could Not Claim Reimbursement For Provision Of Welcome Drink By Adjusting Bills Received From Assessee Between December 19, 2016 To March 4, 2017—Quotes For Supply And Production Of Food In Terms Of Annexure F Inclusive Of Taxes—No Goods And Services Tax On Production Of Food On Date Of Tender Or On Date Of Award Of Licence—Arbitrator Finding Goods And Services Tax Deposited By Assessee And Proof Thereof Furnished To Corporation—Tax Paid To Assessee Available As Input-Tax Credit For Corporation—Assessee Entitled To Reimbursement Of Goods And Services Tax—Interpretation Of Contract By Arbitrator Fair And Reasonable—No Ground For Interference—Arbitration And Conciliation Act (26 Of 1996), s. 34.

Statute: GOODS AND SERVICES TAX
Decision in favour of: ASSESSEE
Title: PRATIBHA-MOSINZHSTROI CONSORTIUM v. COMMISSIONER Of CGST
Rajiv Shakdher And Ms Tara Vitasta Ganju JJ
Citation: [2023] 108 GSTR 424(DELHI)
Bench/Court: IN THE DELHI HIGH COURT

Goods And Services Tax—Registration — Cancellation—Show-Cause Notice Stating No Ground For Cancellation—Inspection Of Premises Not Mentioned In Show-Cause Notice—No Notice Of Physical Inspection Given—Second Show-Cause Notice Issued Pursuant To Assessee Seeking Revocation Of Order—Not Contemplated Under Act—Order In Appeal Affirming Cancellation Not Dealing With Information Given As Regards Relocation Of Member Of Assessee-Consortium Pursuant To Liquidation Proceedings Order Bereft Of Reasons—Entire Proceedings Legally Flawed-Order Set Aside With Liberty To Issue Fresh Show-Cause Notice Central Goods And Services Tax Act (12 Of 2017)—Central Goods And Services Tax Rules, 2017, r. 25.

Statute: GOODS AND SERVICE TAX
Decision in favour of: DEPARTMENT
Title Yasho Industries Limited V. Union Of India
Citation: [2022] 104 GSTR 301 (GUJ)
Bench/Court: in the Gujarat High Court

Goods And Services Tax—Goods And Services Tax Authorities—Jurisdiction—Power To Summon Any Person To Give Evidence Or To Produce Documents In Inquiry—”Proper Officer”—Commissioner Or Officer Of Central Tax Assigned That Function By Commissioner In Board—Senior Intelligence Officer Appointed As Central Tax Officer With All Powers Exercisable By Central Tax Officers Of Corresponding Rank Of Superintendent As Specified In Notification—Is Proper Officer Entitled To Issue Summons Under Section 70 In Connection With Inquiry Initiated Against Assessee—Not A Case Of Delegation Of Powers By Commissioner—Proceedings Pursuant To Communication Of Department Of Revenue Intelligence—No Prejudice To Assessee—No Search And Seizure Proceedings Having Taken Place In Case Of Assessee And Assessee Having Made Payment—Summons Valid—Assessee To Co-Operate—Central Goods And Services Tax Act (12 Of 2017), ss. 2(91), 70, 167—Integrated Goods And Services Tax Act (13 Of 2017), s. 20—Central Board Of Excise And Customs Notification No. 14 Of 2017-CT Dated July 1, 2017.

Statute: GOODS AND SERVICES TAX 
Decision in favour of: RESPONDENT
Title :Indian Railways Catering And Tourism Corporation Ltd V Deepak And Co.
RAJIV SHAKDHER AND TALWANT SINGH JJ
Citation: [2022]104 GSTR 499 (DELHI)
Bench/Court: IN THE DELHI HIGH COURT

Goods and Services Tax—Assessee Granted Licence by Indian Railway Catering and Tourism Corporation to Provide Catering Services on Board Certain Trains—Under Circular Which Was Integral Part Of Tender Assessee Not Obliged To Serve Welcome Drink To Passengers—Corporation Could Not Have Deducted Amounts Expended By Assessee Towards Serving Welcome Drink To Passengers From Bills Of Assessee—Circulars Clearly Providing Applicable Taxes Notified By Government Of India Or State Governments From Time To Time To Be Collected By Zonal Railways From Passengers By Embedding Component In Ticket Fare—Assessee To Bear Liability And Seek Reimbursement Thereof Upon Proof Of Payment To Concerned Statutory Authorities—Finding Of Fact That Goods And Services Tax Deposited By Assesses—Assessee Entitled To Be Reimbursed Goods And Services Tax Deposited By It-Corporation May Claim Input-Tax Credit-Interpretation Of Terms Of Contract, And Appraisal Of Evidence Completely Within Domain Of Arbitrator - Interim Award Of Arbitrator Calling For No Interference.

Statute: VALUE ADDED TAX
Decision in favour of: ASSESSEE
Title: Laxmi Srinivasar And P Boiled Rice Mill V. State Of Andra Pradesh And Another.
SANJV KHANNA AND J.K MAHESHWARI JJ
Citation: [2023] 108 GSTR 358 (SC)
Bench/Court: In The Supreme Court Of India

Value Added Tax — Appeal — Tribunal — Condonation Of Delay—Dismissal Of Writ Petition Giving Liberty To File Appeal Before Appellate Authority—Period Between Date Of Filing Writ Petition And Its Dismissal-Not To Be Counted For Computing Condonable Period Of Delay—Limitation Act (36 Of 1963), s. 14—Andhra Pradesh Value Added Tax Act (5 Of 2005).

Statute: GOODS AND SERVICES TAX
Decision in favour of: ASSESSEE
Title: VETERAN SECURITY SERVICES v. UNION Of INDIA AND OTHERS
ACHINTYA MALLA BUJOR BARUA J.
Citation: [2023] 109 GSTR 435 (GAUHATI)
Bench/Court: IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT

Goods And Services Tax — Registration — Cancellation Of Registration—Writ Petition Seeking Permission To Make Necessary Payments In Forty Eight Instalments —Departmental Authorities  Entitled To Allow Maximum Of Thirty Six Instalments — Discretion Of Court—Assessee And Department To Confer Whether Permissible Instalments Could Be Extended To Forty Eight And Assessee Pay Determined Monthly Instalments Within Seventh Of Every  Month — On Instalments Being Determined And Assessee Continuing To Pay Instalments Order Of Cancellation Of Registration Have No Effect—Central Goods And Services Tax Act (12 of 17), s. 29—Constitution Of India, art. 226.