| Manpower Service / Exemption (Sl. No. 3, Notfn 12/2017) |
Webel Support Multipurpose Service Co Operative Society Ltd., In re |
Pure labour services provided as a sub-contractor to a State Government Company for a government project do not qualify for exemption under Sl. No. 3 of Notification No. 12/2017-CT(R) because the payment was made by the company and not directly by the Government. |
Click Here |
West Bengal Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 |
| Section 9 |
Sunshell Power, In re |
Supply, design, installation, testing, and commissioning of a grid-connected rooftop solar power plant constitutes a composite supply of works contract taxable at 12% on 70% of gross value (goods portion) and 18% on 30% of gross value (services portion). |
Click Here |
Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 |
| Section 9 |
Purnam Cuisines (P.) Ltd., In re |
Peeled and chopped garlic remains classifiable under HSN 0703 as per Chapter 07 notes rather than HSN 2005, attracting a Nil rate of GST. |
Click Here |
Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 |
| Section 12 |
Shoft Shipyard (P.) Ltd., In re |
Pre-GST dispute payments, including interest and arbitration costs awarded for a commercial dispute without any underlying taxable supply under the GST regime, do not attract GST liability. |
Click Here |
Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 |
| Section 62 |
Great Eastern Hire Purchase (P.) Ltd. v. State of Bihar |
Best judgment assessment recovery made by ignoring binding precedent in SIS Cash Services and rejecting an amnesty scheme appeal was held illegal; the State was directed to refund the amount with 9% interest and pay ₹10,000 in litigation costs. |
Click Here |
Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 |
| Section 73 |
Haemotocon 2017 v. State of Assam |
Issuing merely a summary of show cause notice in Form DRC-01 with tax determination attachments without a duly signed and authenticated main SCN from the Proper Officer violates Section 73 and Rule 142(1)(a). |
Click Here |
Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 |
| Section 75 |
Pavan Traders v. State of U.P. |
An adjudication order demanding tax, interest, and penalty in excess of the amounts specified in the underlying show cause notice is invalid and liable to be set aside. |
Click Here |
Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 |
| Section 97 |
Purnam Cuisines (P.) Ltd., In re |
The determination of whether an activity amounts to “manufacture” is not among the matters listed under Section 97(2); hence, no advance ruling can be rendered on such a query. |
Click Here |
Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 |
| Section 107 |
Horizon Hi Tech Engicon Limited v. State of West Bengal |
A delayed appeal resulting from business closure and the director’s illness was remanded to the Appellate Authority for adjudication on merits since the GST Appellate Tribunal had not yet been established. |
Click Here |
Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 |
| Section 129 |
Athiyan Exports v. State Tax Officer, Tirunelveli |
Transporting goods for export without generating an e-Invoice or e-Way Bill is a technical/venial breach; where the physical export actually occurred, a lesser penalty is justified without denying export benefits. |
Click Here |
Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 |
| Section 161 |
Tvl. Sri Balaji Metal Trading v. Deputy State Tax Officer-1 |
Summary dismissal of a rectification application regarding ITC denial without addressing the assessee’s claim under newly inserted Section 16(5) is improper; matter remanded for fresh consideration. |
Click Here |
Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 |
