Back
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
APARESH KUMAR SINGH, G.M.MOHIUDDIN
BirlaNu Ltd., (Registered As ISD Unit), Rep. By Its Authorized Representative – Appellant
Versus
Union Of India – Respondent
ORDER :
Heard Sri Sparsh Bhargava, learned counsel representing Smt.Shireen Sethna Baria, learned counsel for the petitioner; Smt.Bokaro Sapna Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for CBIC and Sri B.Mukherjee, learned counsel representing Sri N.Bhujanga Rao, learned Deputy Solicitor General of India appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 4 and perused the record.
2. The present Writ Petition is filed challenging the constitutional validity of Rule 39(1)(a) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules 2017 (for short ‘CGST Rules’), the Final Audit Report dated 22.01.2024 and the consequential show-cause notice dated 30.01.2024 proposing a penalty of Rs.8,38,67,332/- under Section 122 (1)(ix) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (for short, ‘CGST Act, 2017’).
Factual matrix (in brief)
3. The petitioner M/s. BirlaNu Limited is registered as an Input Service Distributor (ISD) under the CGST Act. During the audit for the financial years 2017-2018 and 2018-2019, respondent Nos.2 to 4 observed that the petitioner had accumulated Input Tax Credit (ITC) during each Financial Year (for short, ‘FY’) and distributed the accumulated ITC in the last month (March 2018-2019) instead of distributing i
![Sance Laboratories Private Limited VS Union of India, Represented by Its Secretary, Ministry of Finance [Department of Revenue] - 2024 Supreme(Ker) 1148](https://supremetoday-s3.b-cdn.net/Kerala_1.png)
Rule 96(10) of the CGST Rules was declared ultra vires Section 16 of the IGST Act for imposing unjust restrictions on exporters' right to claim IGST refunds.
Rule 36(4) of the CGST Rules is valid as it derives authority from Section 16 of the CGST Act, not Section 43A, which was never enforced.
Rule 96(10) of the CGST Rules, which restricted refunds of IGST on exports where benefits of certain notifications were availed, was declared void for future cases following its omission by new legis....
Input Tax Credit (ITC) is a concession/benefit/rebate and the legislature is within its competency to impose certain conditions, including time prescription for availing such right.
The requirement to submit TRAN-1 for claiming transitional credit under Section 140 of the CGST Act, 2017 is mandatory and cannot be bypassed.
Proceedings under Section 74 of the CGST Act cannot be initiated without evidence of fraud or misstatement if prior proceedings under Section 73 have been concluded.
Section 16(4) of the CGST Act is constitutionally valid and does not violate Articles 14, 19(1)(g), or 300A of the Constitution.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
