The Supreme Court of India, in Viraj Impex Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India [S.L.P.(C) Nos. 1979, 2297, 2778, 1977 of 2019, decided on 21.01.2026], has held that a notification issued under the Foreign Trade (Development and Regulation) Act, 1992 becomes legally enforceable only from the date of its publication in the Official Gazette.
In the matter of Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs v. Aberdare Technologies Pvt. Ltd. , the Supreme Court of India, in a decision dated March 21, 2025 [Special Leave Petition (Civil) Diary No. 6332 of 2025, decided on 21-3-2025], affirmed the judgment of the Bombay High Court which held that an assessee must be permitted to rectify bona fide errors in its GST returns even after the expiry of the limitation period prescribed under Section 39(9) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, provided such errors do not
Adjudication of excess stock must be conducted under Section 73/74 of CGST Act rather than through confiscation proceedings under Section 130 of the CGST Act
Supreme Court Clarifies Educational Consultancy Services as Export of Services, Not Intermediary Recently, in the case of Commissioner of Goods and Service Tax, DGST Delhi
GST Proceedings Post-Cancellation Cannot Be Sustained Where Notice Is Served Solely Through GST Portal – Violation of Section 169 and Natural Justice Opening Summary In
GST Recovery: Karnataka High Court Holds Common Directorship Insufficient to Justify Lifting Corporate Veil for Tax Dues In the case of Ramms India Pvt. Ltd.
Audit under Section 65 of CGST Act, 2017 Cannot be Conducted, if Business of the Taxpayer is Closed : 2023-ProIndiaClub(HC) 12 Recently in case of
GST Officer can request additional documents to process refund application : Delhi High Court SRG PLASTIC COMPANY versus THE COMMISSIONER DELHI GOODS AND SERVICES TAX
A game of skill is not gambling Gameskraft Technologies Private Limited Vs Directorate General of Goods Services Tax Intelligence Writ Petition No. 19570 of 2022
Bombay High Court-GST: Refund rejection order set aside where deficiencies found through SCN instead of Deficiency Memo and opportunity of being heard also not given:
GSTR-1 vs GSTR-3B Mismatch — Remand Mandatory Under Section 75(2) Upon Conversion from Section 74 to Section 73 [Goods and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal – Principal Bench, New Delhi]
Recently, Telangana State Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling in Order-in-Appeal No. AAAR/10/2022 dated 19.10.2022 has held that liquidated damages recoverable by the applicant from Bi-electric
WhatsApp us
