| Circular No. |
Subject |
|
Circular No.
249/06/2025-GST dt. 09.06.2025 |
Generation
and quoting of Document Identification Number (DIN) on any communication
issued by the officers of the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and
Customs (CBIC) to tax payers and other concerned persons |
|
Circular No. 239/33/2024-GST
dt. 04.12.2024 |
Amendment to
Circular No. 31/05/2018-GST, dated 9th February, 2018 on 'Proper officer
under sections 73 and 74 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017
and under the Integrated Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017' |
|
Circular No. 238/32/2024-GST dt.
15.10.2024 |
Clarification of various doubts related to Section 128A of the CGST Act,
2017. |
|
Circular No.
237/31/2024-GST dt.15.10.2024 [Para 3] |
Clarifying the issues
regarding implementation of provisions of sub-section (5) and
sub-section (6) in section 16 of CGST Act, 2017. |
|
Circular No. 185/17/2022-GST
dt. 27.12.2022 |
Clarification with regard to applicability of provisions of section
75(2) of Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and its effect on
limitation |
|
Circular No. 171/03/2022-GST
dt. 06.07.2022 [Para 1 (1)] |
Clarification on various issues relating to applicability of demand and
penalty provisions under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 in
respect of transactions involving fake invoices. |
|
Circular
No.169/01/2022-GST dt. 12.03.2022 |
Amendment to Circular No. 31/05/2018-GST,
dated 9th February, 2018 on ‘Proper officer under sections 73 and 74 of
the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and under the Integrated
Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 |
|
Circular
No.128/47/2019-GST dt. 23.12.2019 |
Generation
and quoting of Document Identification Number (DIN) on any communication
issued by the officers of the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and
Customs (CBIC) to tax payers and other concerned persons |
|
Circular No.
122/41/2019-GST dt. 05.11.2019 |
Generation
and quoting of Document Identification Number (DIN) on any communication
issued by the officers of the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and
Customs (CBIC) to tax payers and other concerned persons |
|
Circular
No. 76/50/2018-GST dt. 31.12.2018 [Para 2] |
Clarification on certain issues (sale by
government departments to unregistered person; leviability of penalty
under section 73(11) of the CGST Act; rate of tax in case of debit notes
/ credit notes issued under section 142(2) of the CGST Act;
applicability of notification No. 50/2018-Central Tax; valuation
methodology in case of TCS under Income Tax Act and definition of owner
of goods) related to GST |
|
Circular
No. 31/5/2018-GST dt. 09-02-2018 |
Proper officer under sections 73
and 74 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and under the
Integrated Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 |
|
Authority |
One liner |
|
2025(07)LCX0209
Madras High Court
R Ashaarajaa |
Bunching
multiple financial years into one GST show-cause notice is statutorily
impermissible. |
|
2025(07)LCX0204
Bombay High Court
Nuvoco Vistas Corporation |
Courts will
not interfere with show cause notices unless jurisdictional error is
evident on the face. |
|
2025(07)LCX0195
Allahabad High Court
SREI Equipment Finance Limited |
Tax
authorities cannot enforce pre-CIRP claims post-approval of the
Resolution Plan under IBC. |
|
2025(07)LCX0147
Madras High Court
Agri Tech Corporation |
Assessment
orders violating natural justice and lacking clear procedural compliance
must be re-adjudicated on terms. |
|
2025(07)LCX0096
Allahabad High Court
Tripureshwari Traders |
GST notices must be served through alternative means once registration
is cancelled; portal upload alone is insufficient. |
|
2025(07)LCX0086
Allahabad High Court
Lalaram Thekedar |
Service of notice solely via portal post-registration cancellation
violates natural justice. |
|
2025(07)LCX0084
Andhra Pradesh High Court
Godavari Polymers Private Limited |
Absence of DIN and signature in GST orders renders them void and
unenforceable
|
|
2025(07)LCX0037
Calcutta High Court
Hotel Rudra |
Ex parte
orders without hearing violate natural justice and warrant remand for
fresh adjudication. |
|
2025(06)LCX0475
Madras High Court
Tata Play Limited |
Section
168A empowers the Government to extend statutory timelines during
extraordinary circumstances; notifications issued thereunder are valid. |
|
2025(06)LCX0453
Madras High Court
Tvl SKP Readymix |
Assessment orders must reflect application
of mind and deal with taxpayers replies through reasoned discussion. |
|
2025(06)LCX0400
Gauhati High Court
Mahabir Tiwari |
Notification No. 56/2023-Central Tax is ultra vires due to the absence
of GST Council recommendation and force majeure conditions, rendering
subsequent actions invalid. |
|
2025(06)LCX0319
Gauhati High Court
Biswa Ranjan Borah |
Summary
notices without proper show cause and hearing violate Sections 73 and
75(4) of CGST Act. |
|
2025(06)LCX0311
Allahabad High Court
F K Fancy Zari Art |
Mere reproduction of a GST notice without reasoning violates Section
75(6) and renders the order invalid. |
|
2025(06)LCX0302
Madras High Court
Tvl Leto |
Portal-only service without exploring alternate modes under Section 169
violates natural justice. |
|
2025(05)LCX0146
Allahabad High Court
Janta Machine Tools |
Tax demand
for excess stock must follow Section 73/74, not Section 130 of GST Act |
|
2025(04)LCX0430
Madras High Court
Indian Railway Finance Corporation
Limited |
Natural justice mandates that new grounds in tax orders must be preceded
by due notice and hearing. |
|
2025(04)LCX0167
Kerala High Court
Mjbr Marketing And Financial Services
Private Limited |
CBIC
Circular No.192/04/2023 held that electronic credit ledger must be
treated as a unified pool of funds across tax heads, where CGST, SGST,
and IGST credits are considered as separate compartments of one wallet |
|
2025(04)LCX0152
Allahabad High Court
Gupta Traders |
Demand
order u/s 73 of the UP GST Act is quashed as time-barred, as orders for
FY 2017–18 issued after 05.02.2023 were beyond the statutory limit |
|
2025(03)LCX0377
Delhi High Court
Neelgiri Machinery |
Orders
passed and uploaded under "Additional Notices and Orders," tab making
less directly visible were set aside in view of ensuring compliance with
principles of natural justice and importance of proper communication and
accessibility of notices |
|
2025(03)LCX0140
Kolkata Tribunal
Raza International |
Commissioner (Appeals) is obligated to pass a detailed ex-parte order
after reviewing the importer Statement of Facts and Grounds of Appeal,
regardless of the importer presence at the hearing. |
|
2025(03)LCX0007
Kolkata Tribunal
Asha Enterprises |
Non
challenging of the assessment order is deemed to attain finality and
initiation of any subsequent proceedings against such order is erroneous |
|
2025(03)LCX0001
Bombay High Court
Precaution Properties Private Limited |
Court
granted interim relief against coercive action u/s 73 of the CGST Act,
pending the SC's decision on the validity of N/No. 9/2023-CT &
56/2023-CT issued without GST Council recommendations |
|
2025(02)LCX0191
Allahabad High Court
Anita Traders |
Considering
the fact that notification dated 24.04.2023 extending time limit for
passing of an order u/s 73(9) is not applicable in case of Assessment
Order passed on 02.12.2023, the same is set aside. |
|
2025(02)LCX0315
Supreme court of India
Hcc-Sew-Meil-Aag JV |
Matter regarding validity of extension of
time limit for adjudication of show cause notice and passing order under
Section 73 of the GST is pending. |
|
2025(02)LCX0129
Telangana High Court
Bigleap Technologies and Solutions
Private Limited |
Unsigned
show-cause notices and final orders under GST even when uploaded online
are invalid because the signature column in the prescribed forms
constitutes a mandatory statutory requirement for authenticity. |
|
2025(01)LCX0426
Madras High Court
Tvl V K D Stores |
Assessment
order issued u/s 73 GST Act set aside as assessee was unaware of the
proceedings due to the notices being uploaded on the GST portal instead
of being properly served |
|
2025(01)LCX0425
Madras High Court
Tvl Jainsons Castors and Industrial
Products |
Assessment
order issued u/s 73 GST Act set aside as assessee was unaware of the
proceedings due to the notices being uploaded on the GST portal instead
of being properly served |
|
2025(01)LCX0033
Chandigarh Tribunal
Iffco Tokio Insurance Services Limited |
Cenvat
credit cannot be denied due to procedural irregularities |
|
2025(01)LCX0015
Telangana High Court
Brunda Infra Private Limited |
GST
notification extensions of limitation periods due to COVID-19 were
upheld relying on a Supreme Court order excluding a specific period for
limitation rendering challenges to the notifications academic while also
noting the assessee availability of statutory appeals. |
|
2024(12)LCX0478
Gauhati High Court
Rosida Sultana |
Issuance of
the Summary of the SCN, Summary of the Statement and Summary of the
Order do not dispense with the requirement of issuance of a proper SCN
and Statement as well as passing of the Order as per the mandate of
Section 73 of CGST Act by the Proper Officer. |
|
2024(11)LCX0379
Allahabad High Court
A V Pharma |
Orders
issued by the Deputy Commissionerare quashed for beyond the time limit
prescribed U/S73and assessee bank accounts is to be de-freezed |
|
2024(11)LCX0039
Bombay High Court
Esjapee Impex (P) Ltd. |
Adjudicating Authority should have adjudicated the SCN within a
reasonable time; failure to do so is bound to cause prejudice to the
assessee. |
|
2024(11)LCX0012
Allahabad High Court
Ashish Traders |
Assessee is entitled to the benefit of doubt when Notice not been
uploaded on the Due Notices and Orders and instead uploaded on
Additional Notices and Orders |
|
2024(10)LCX0143
Gauhati High Court
Udit Tibrewal |
Non-issuance of a proper and prior SCN, as contemplated u/s 73(1) of GST
Act and issuance of only Summary of SCN and Attachment to Determination
of Tax cannot be said to be in compliance with Section 73(1) read with
rule 142(1), a Summary of SCN is held to be not a substitute of a SCN. |
|
2024(09)LCX0571
Allahabad High Court
Wonder Enterprises |
Passing an appellate order on a date later than the hearing without
statutory backing violates GST procedural fairness. |
|
2024(09)LCX0567
Karnataka High Court
Jagadish Advertising |
Extended
limitation under Section 73 cannot be invoked without specific,
substantiated allegations of fraud or suppression. |
|
2024(05)LCX0330
Allahabad High Court
Graziano Trasmissioni |
Extension
N/No. 09/2023 u/s 168A for adjudicating proceedings for the FY 2017-18
is valid. |
|
2024(05)LCX0274
Delhi High Court
Mitchem Impex |
Proper
officer could not have adjudicated the SCN prior to the stipulated date
for filing response. |
|
2024(04)LCX0206
Delhi High Court
AB Traders |
Proper
officer cannot held that the reply is unsatisfactory without considering
the reply and enclosed documents |
|
2024(02)LCX0425
Delhi High Court
Aarem TradEx Private Limited |
Proper
officer need to at least consider the reply on merits before forming an
opinion whether the explanation of assessee was sufficient or not. |
|
2024(02)LCX0423
Delhi High Court
Emco Cables (India) Private Limited |
Proper
officer need to at least consider the reply on merits before forming an
opinion whether the explanation of assessee was sufficient or not. |
|
2024(01)LCX0498
Allahabad High Court
Khanna Polyrib Private Limited |
Assessee's
right to object to the SCN and participate in the personal hearing
cannot be comprised if SCN had been served without all its contents and
annexures |
|
2023(11)LCX0167
Madhya Pradesh High Court
Raymond Ltd |
Show cause
notice falls short of the minimum period to afford reasonable
opportunity and also lacking in material particular, thereby set aside. |
|
2023(10)LCX0105
Kerala High Court
Global Plasto Wares |
GST: Penalty leviable when tax collected is not deposited within 30 days
|
|
2021(07)LCX0205
Allahabad High Court
V.S. Enterprises |
Multiple overlapping GST orders for same
period are invalid; fresh adjudication must follow due process.
|
|
2021(02)LCX0096
Jharkhand High Court
R.P.M. Distributors |
For delayed
payment of tax, the interest would be levied on net tax liability.
|
|
2021(01)LCX0284
Patna High Court
Pinax Steel Industries Pvt.
Ltd |
Order passed without hearing violated
natural justice; matter remanded for fresh adjudication after proper
opportunity.
|
|
2019(06)LCX0002
Patna High Court
Commercial Steel
Engineering Corporation |
Court allowed transitional credit for FY
2007-08 and 2011-12 which was not reflected in prior returns due to
Accountant's mistake |
|
2019(03)LCX0033
Rajasthan High Court
Leel Electricals Limited |
Court is not convinced by arguments advanced
by petitioner, therfore notice of summon is not quashed |
