Part-149-One Pager Snapshot to Cases on Section 11, 29, 168 of CGST Act, 2017 and Rule 142(1A) of CGST Rules, 2017

-Since SCN covered both pre-amended and post amended period for Rule 142(1A), therefore second authority after transfer of file should not have directly issued SCN in DRC01 and should have again issued intimation in DRC-01A since the first authority after issuing DRC-01A had not taken any action.

-Notice issued for issue regarding Taxability of Lease of Land in GST

-Section 29-Althugh SCN contained alleged reason for cancellation of registration but the order did not contain any reason, therefore the matter was set aside for officer to decide the matter again.

-No provision of the CGST Act, in terms of which the TRU could be said to have been clothed with the authority or jurisdiction to render a clarification with respect to classification of goods and articles

-Exemption provided by the Central Government by exercising its powers either U/Sec 11(1) of CGST Act, 2017 or U/Sec 6(1) of IGST Act, 2017 are substantive right provided to stakeholders and such exemptions cannot be taken away or done away by issuing clarificatory Circulars by the Board, in exercise of its powers under Section 168

Part-144-One Pager Snapshot to Cases on Section 16, 29, 75, 107 of CGST Act, 2017

-Since reminder notice only contained the date by which reply is to be submitted and NA was mentioned at the date of hearing thus provisions of Section 75(4) have not been followed.

-Refund cannot be withheld only because as on today, department has not taken the decision whether to review the order-in-appeal or to file an appeal against the said order

-Cancellation order passed without providing any reason is not sustainable in the eyes of the law.

-Benefit of Circular for mismatch shall be accorded even though the benefit was not availed ta adjudication stage and matter might have travelled to appellate stage.

Part-140-One Pager Snapshot to Cases on Section 29,74 and 129 of CGST Act, 2017

-Upon a purposive reading, it would be suffice to state that the legislation makes intent to evade tax a sine qua non for initiation of the proceedings under sections 129 and 130 of the CGST Act.

-Authorities cannot assert that recipient has failed to bring facts about payment of tax by supplier as the same can be verified from the portal as to how much tax has been deposited by the selling dealer

-No Opportunity for cross examination required as enquiry conducted and statement taken of landlord was not a trial, but a summary proceeding to find out whether registered dealer is conducting any business from declared place of business

Part-138-One Pager Snapshot to Cases on Section 6, 29, 73, 75, of CGST Act, 2017

-Mandatory to provide opportunity of hearing even if assessee signified “no” on the portal
-Invalid Cancellation of registration based on vague SCN
-Proceedings initiated by two different authorities can be consolidated with one of the authorities and taxpayer cannot insist that proceedings shall continue with which authority or should be continued with the authority who had first taken up the issue
-SCN dropped as issue was already covered by an earlier SCN issued by different authority cannot be treated to have been decided on merit