TaxCorp Service Tax

Service Tax Highlights

11-06-2026 (2026) TaxCorp(ST) 43314 (HC-JHARKHAND)

Jharkhand High Court Directs Department to Compute Refund or Tax Liability with Interest Based on Appellate Order, Leaves Merits Open - The Jharkhand High Court disposed of the writ petition by directing the departmental authority to promptly implement the appellate order. The authority was instructed to ascertain, after hearing the petitioner, whether a refund with interest was due to the assessee or whether any tax liability with interest remained payable, and to communicate the outcome within a fixed timeline. The High Court made it clear that it would not itself undertake the arithmetical exercise, nor adjudicate on the merits of the computation, leaving all merits and contentions expressly open for future challenge if needed.

15-06-2026 (2026) TaxCorp(ST) 43313 (CESTAT-KOLKATA)

CESTAT Kolkata Quashes Service Tax Demand: No Reverse Charge Liability on Withheld Royalty in Works Contracts Without Mining Rights - On the facts presented, the Tribunal categorically held that the amounts shown as royalty in the appellants’ accounts were not royalty paid for mining rights, but only withheld components of works contract bills. The absence of evidence of a mining licence or actual payment of royalty as a licence holder meant the reverse charge mechanism was not triggered. The Tribunal further held that, in such circumstances, reliance solely on balance sheet entries without supporting evidence could not justify invocation of the extended period. Actionable takeaway: assessees should ensure that any amounts withheld as royalty are properly documented as withheld components, and not treated as royalty paid for mining rights unless a mining licence is actually obtained and royalty paid accordingly.

15-06-2026 (2026) TaxCorp(ST) 43312 (CESTAT-KOLKATA)

CESTAT Kolkata Sets Aside Service Tax Demand: No Extended Limitation on Sole Basis of Form 26AS, Reverse Charge and Threshold Exemption Upheld for Proprietary Manpower Service Provider - The CESTAT Kolkata has set aside the entire demand of service tax, interest, and penalty against the appellant. The Tribunal’s order is grounded in the correct application of the reverse charge mechanism for proprietary manpower supply services, recognition of threshold exemption for small service providers, prohibition of double taxation, and the inapplicability of the extended limitation period based exclusively on Form 26AS data without corroborative evidence. Assessees facing similar factual matrices should ensure proper documentation and full disclosure in returns, and can confidently contest demands raised on similar grounds.

12-06-2026 (2026) TaxCorp(ST) 43311 (CESTAT-HYDERABAD)

Service Tax Demand Must Account for Cum-Tax Valuation and TDS; Extended Limitation and Penalties under Sections 76, 77, 78 of Finance Act, 1994 Set Aside for Lack of Suppression or Mens Rea - The CESTAT Hyderabad concluded that the service tax liability was wrongly computed due to the failure to extend cum-tax benefit and proper TDS consideration. The matter was remanded solely for re-quantification of tax liability after granting these benefits. The extended period of limitation was held inapplicable in the absence of suppression or intent to evade, leading to the setting aside of penalties under Sections 76, 77, and 78 of the Finance Act, 1994.

12-06-2026 (2026) TaxCorp(ST) 43310 (CESTAT-HYDERABAD)

CESTAT Hyderabad Disallows Denial of CENVAT Credit on Leadership Fee for Composite Turnkey Contracts Despite ISD Procedural Lapses - Based on the above findings, the CESTAT Hyderabad concluded that CENVAT credit on the leadership fee was admissible, as all substantive requirements—tax payment, service receipt, and ISD distribution—were satisfied, and the fee related to the entire integrated turnkey project. The denial of credit on procedural grounds or by artificially segmenting the contract was found unsustainable. The Tribunal, therefore, set aside the demands for credit reversal, interest, and penalty.

12-06-2026 (2026) TaxCorp(ST) 43309 (CESTAT-HYDERABAD)

Tribunal Upholds SEZ Refund Despite Procedural Defects: Substantive Use for Authorised Operations Takes Precedence - On the basis of the above findings, the Tribunal concluded that where the substantive eligibility for SEZ refund is established—i.e., the services have been actually used for authorised operations of the SEZ unit and service tax has been duly paid—minor procedural lapses in documentation do not justify denial of refund. The impugned order rejecting the claim was set aside, and the appellant was granted the refund with all consequential reliefs. Assessees should ensure that while procedural compliance is maintained, genuine lapses that do not impinge upon the substantive conditions should not be a ground for denial of SEZ benefits.

12-06-2026 (2026) TaxCorp(ST) 43308 (SC)

Supreme Court Affirms Binding Nature of High Court Precedent on Tribunal in Service Tax Dispute over Mining Activities - Based on the above reasoning, the Supreme Court dismissed the appeal, confirming that the Tribunal rightly relied upon the Calcutta High Court’s authoritative pronouncement. The ruling underscores that unless a High Court decision is reversed or overruled by a higher judicial forum, it remains binding on Tribunals and other subordinate authorities. The present decision provides strong judicial backing for the continued application of settled legal principles by lower forums.

10-06-2026 (2026) TaxCorp(ST) 43307 (CESTAT-CHENNAI)

CESTAT Chennai Bars Service Tax on Upfront Water Supply Capital Cost in 99-Year Industrial Lease, Citing Department's Prior Consistency - The Tribunal categorically held that since the Department had earlier decided that the upfront water supply capital cost under a 99-year industrial lease is not liable to service tax, and as this finding was not challenged, it could not now revisit the issue against the assessee for a subsequent period. The impugned demand, together with interest and penalty, was set aside, and the exemption stood confirmed for the disputed amount.

10-06-2026 (2026) TaxCorp(ST) 43306 (CESTAT-HYDERABAD)

CESTAT Hyderabad Directs Re-Adjudication on Service Tax for Irrigation EPC Contracts; Status of Supreme Court Appeal Against Larger Bench Ruling to Determine Outcome - On the basis of the above, the Tribunal’s actionable directive is clear: the original adjudicating authority must first obtain clarity on the fate of the Supreme Court appeal against the CESTAT Larger Bench decision in M/s Lanco Infratech Ltd. Only thereafter should the authority decide the issue of service tax liability on irrigation-related turnkey/EPC contracts in accordance with the prevailing legal position established either by the Larger Bench or, if applicable, by the Supreme Court. This approach ensures that the final adjudication is both legally robust and consistent with the current state of the law.

11-06-2026 (2026) TaxCorp(ST) 43305 (CESTAT-KOLKATA)

CESTAT Kolkata Rules Evacuation of Ash from Pond Not Taxable as Service; Allows Adjustment of Already Paid Tax and Limits Penalties in Revenue-Neutral Cases - The CESTAT Kolkata’s order effectively relieves the appellant from service tax liability on evacuation of settled ash and under reverse charge, due to established legal precedent and revenue neutrality, respectively. For works contract and manpower supply services, the Tribunal permits adjustment of tax already paid and directs that any balance be appropriated from the investigation deposit, leaving only interest, if any, as recoverable. Penalty under Section 78 is set aside due to lack of evidence of suppression, while penalty under Section 77 for procedural lapses is maintained. Assessees in similar positions should ensure meticulous documentation of tax payments and compliance with procedural requirements to benefit from these rulings.

11-06-2026 (2026) TaxCorp(ST) 43304 (CESTAT-KOLKATA)

Service Tax Demand Based Solely on Form 26AS Data Fails as CESTAT Kolkata Rules Extended Limitation Period Not Invocable Without Proof of Suppression - On comprehensive analysis, CESTAT Kolkata has held that service tax demands based solely on Form 26AS or income tax data, without corroborative evidence and in the face of prior voluntary disclosures by the assessee, cannot justify invocation of the extended limitation period under the Finance Act, 1994. The show cause notice and the resultant demand, being time-barred and lacking in evidentiary support for suppression, are liable to be quashed.

05-06-2026 (2026) TaxCorp(ST) 43303 (CESTAT-NEW DELHI)

Issuance of Consignment Note Crucial for GTA Taxability: CESTAT Sets Aside Service Tax Demand on Mere Road Transporters - Based on a thorough interpretation of the statutory provisions, judicial precedent, and the facts presented, the Tribunal concluded that the appellant was not engaged in the provision of taxable Goods Transport Agency service due to the absence of consignment note issuance. The demand for service tax, interest, and penalties was set aside. Assessees engaged in mere road transportation without issuance of consignment notes are not liable to pay service tax under the post-negative list regime.

08-06-2026 (2026) TaxCorp(ST) 43302 (CESTAT-CHENNAI)

CESTAT Chennai Affirms Refund Eligibility for Exporters Despite Procedural Lapse in Declaration Filing, Recognizes CENVAT Credit Reversal as Non-Availment - On the facts and law presented, the Tribunal concluded that reversal of CENVAT credit by the exporter, documented in statutory filings and reported to the authorities, fulfills the “non-availment” requirement specified in the exemption notification. Furthermore, a procedural lapse in declaration filing does not justify denial of refund when there is no dispute regarding export of services and use of dutiable input services. The appeal was allowed, the impugned denial order quashed, and the appellant was permitted to cure the procedural defect for the relevant period.

08-06-2026 (2026) TaxCorp(ST) 43301 (CESTAT-CHENNAI)

Service Tax Demand on Works Contract for Private Educational Institutions Quashed by CESTAT Chennai: Construction for Non-Commercial Educational Use Held Non-Taxable - Given the clear precedent and the absence of any evidence to the contrary, the Tribunal held that works contract services provided for the construction of educational institutions, even if private, do not attract service tax under the category of commercial construction. The Department’s attempt to revive the demand on the basis of the institutions being private was rejected, and the appeal was dismissed accordingly. Taxpayers and contractors engaged in similar activities may confidently rely on this position for the disputed period.

09-06-2026 (2026) TaxCorp(ST) 43300 (CESTAT-CHENNAI)

CESTAT Chennai Sets Aside Service Tax Demand: Extended Limitation Period Not Invocable Where Suppression Not Established and CERA Audit Objection Disputed by Department - The CESTAT Chennai, on a preliminary assessment of limitation, allowed the appeal and set aside the impugned order. The Tribunal held that where the departmental demand arises from a disputed CERA audit objection and there is no substantive evidence of suppression or willful misstatement, the extended period of limitation under Section 73(1) of the Finance Act, 1994 cannot be invoked. As the show cause notice was issued beyond the normal period, and the extended period was not available, the demand was held to be unsustainable and was quashed.

29-05-2026 (2026) TaxCorp(ST) 43299 (CESTAT-CHENNAI)

Tribunal Upholds Immunity from Section 78 Penalty Where Service Tax and Interest Are Paid Prior to Show Cause Notice: CESTAT Chennai Clarifies Section 73(3) Protection - The CESTAT Chennai has reaffirmed that where a taxpayer has discharged the full service tax liability and interest before the issuance of a show-cause notice, the bar contained in Section 73(3) of the Finance Act, 1994, comes into play, precluding the department from issuing a notice or levying a penalty under Section 78 for the same amount. Taxpayers should ensure prompt payment of tax and interest upon self-ascertainment or intimation by authorities to avail statutory immunity from penalties.

01-06-2026 (2026) TaxCorp(ST) 43298 (CESTAT-CHENNAI)

CESTAT Chennai Overturns Service Tax Demand on Villa Projects: Individual Construction Agreements Escape ‘Residential Complex’ Tax Net Despite Gated Community Amenities - The CESTAT Chennai conclusively held that construction of individual villas, even when situated within a larger gated community with shared amenities, does not ipso facto attract service tax under the “residential complex service” category where each construction is the subject of an independent agreement, individual approval, and distinct plot identification. The Tribunal, relying on statutory interpretation and binding precedents, set aside the entire tax demand and related consequences, providing actionable clarity for similarly placed assessees.

01-06-2026 (2026) TaxCorp(ST) 43297 (CESTAT-ALLAHABAD)

CESTAT Allahabad Upholds Mandatory Interest Liability on Delayed Service Tax Deposits Despite Absence of Fraud or Bureaucratic Delays - CESTAT Allahabad conclusively held that the liability to pay statutory interest on belatedly deposited service tax is absolute and mandatory under Section 75 of the Finance Act, 1994. The mitigating circumstances cited by the appellant, including bureaucratic delays or lack of intent to evade, were found to be legally irrelevant for the purpose of interest liability. The Tribunal’s order affirms that the recovery of such interest is justified and must stand.

02-06-2026 (2026) TaxCorp(ST) 43296 (CESTAT-ALLAHABAD)

No Service Tax on Transportation and Insurance Where No Goods Transport Agency Involved; Reverse Charge Unjustified for Services Consumed by Foreign Branch; No Extended Limitation on Disclosed Transactions - The Tribunal decisively set aside the impugned order and allowed the appeal, holding that (i) transportation and insurance charges were not taxable as Business Support Service in the absence of a GTA relationship, (ii) services received by a foreign branch for use outside India were not subject to service tax under reverse charge, and (iii) extended period, penalty, and interest could not be sustained where demands were based solely on publicly disclosed financial data.

02-06-2026 (2026) TaxCorp(ST) 43295 (CESTAT-AHMEDABAD)

Jurisdictional Infirmity Voids Service Tax Demand: CESTAT Ahmedabad Quashes Demand Overloading Contract Not Classifiable as Manpower Supply, Citing Centralized Registration at Kolkata - The CESTAT Ahmedabad decisively held that the show cause notice and adjudication by authorities outside the Commissionerate of centralized service tax registration are without legal sanction. The Tribunal further ruled that contracts structured for execution of specified work, where the contractor retains control and is paid based on output, cannot be classified as manpower supply services under the prevailing legal framework. Assessees with centralized registration should ensure that all departmental proceedings are initiated only by the appropriate Commissionerate, and that contract documentation reflects the true nature of the work to avoid misclassification and unwarranted tax demands.

02-06-2026 (2026) TaxCorp(ST) 43294 (CESTAT-CHENNAI)

CESTAT Chennai Rules Tea Estate Leasing as Agricultural Activity, Not Taxable Under Renting or Service Categories - The CESTAT, Chennai, categorically held that the leasing of tea estates, together with all associated facilities essential for plantation operations, constituted a composite agricultural arrangement. This arrangement could not be dissected and taxed under various service tax categories such as renting of immovable property, manpower supply, or supply of tangible goods. The absence of independent consideration and control over manpower or machinery further reinforced the Tribunal’s finding that the demands were unsustainable. The appeals were thus allowed, and all related demands and penalties were set aside.

03-06-2026 (2026) TaxCorp(ST) 43293 (CESTAT-HYDERABAD)

CESTAT Hyderabad Rules Demurrage and Dispatch Money Not Taxable as Port or Declared Services; Reverse Charge Demand on Consulting Engineering Service Disallowed Where Indian Establishment Paid Tax - Based on a thorough examination of statutory provisions, circulars, and legal precedents, the CESTAT Hyderabad decisively held that demurrage and dispatch money are not exigible to service tax under either port services or declared services, as they are not consideration for independent services rendered but are contractually linked to the transportation of goods. Furthermore, in cases where a foreign service provider has an Indian establishment that is registered and has discharged service tax on a forward charge basis, a reverse charge demand on the recipient in India is not legally sustainable. Consequently, all appeals were allowed, and the impugned orders and penalties were set aside.

03-06-2026 (2026) TaxCorp(ST) 43292 (CESTAT-HYDERABAD)

Railway’s Allocation of Advertising Space Constitutes Renting of Immovable Property, Not Support Services: CESTAT Hyderabad Rules Out Reverse Charge and Penalties - The Tribunal’s ruling decisively establishes that allotment of advertising space by Railways constitutes “renting of immovable property” rather than “support services,” and is not liable to service tax under the reverse charge mechanism. The demand for service tax on the premise of support services was rightfully rejected, and any liability that arises is under forward charge. The Tribunal also confirmed that there was no scope for invoking the extended period of limitation or for imposing penalties in this context.

01-06-2026 (2026) TaxCorp(ST) 43291 (CESTAT-BANGALORE)

Service Tax Exemption Denied on Commercial Shop Rentals within Church Premises: CESTAT Bangalore Confines Demand to Normal Period, Sets Aside Penalties - The CESTAT Bangalore concluded that the appellant religious body was not entitled to service tax exemption under clauses 4 or 5 of Notification No. 25/2012-ST for rental income from commercial shops within church premises. Service tax is thus payable from 01.07.2012 onwards. However, in view of the bona fide belief and transparent accounting by the appellant, the demand was restricted to the normal period of limitation and all penalties were set aside. Assessees in similar circumstances must carefully evaluate the nature of their activities vis-à-vis the requirements of the notification to avoid future disputes and penalties.

02-06-2026 (2026) TaxCorp(ST) 43290 (CESTAT-CHENNAI)

CESTAT Chennai Upholds Abatement Despite CENVAT Credit on Common Input Services: Rule 6(5) Non Obstante Clause Prevails Over Notification No. 1/2006-ST - The CESTAT Chennai categorically held that the availment of CENVAT credit on specified common input services under Rule 6(5) of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 does not disentitle an assessee from claiming abatement under Notification No. 1/2006-ST, provided such services are not exclusively used for exempted services. The Tribunal, therefore, allowed the appeal and set aside the impugned order, reaffirming the overriding effect of the non obstante clause in Rule 6(5) over the restrictive proviso in the notification.

02-06-2026 (2026) TaxCorp(ST) 43289 (CESTAT-HYDERABAD)

Exclusive Assignment of Toll Collection Rights by NHAI Held Taxable: Franchise Service up to 30.06.2012 and Taxable Supply Thereafter—Sovereign Function and Negative List Pleas Rejected by CESTAT Hyderabad - The Tribunal, on detailed consideration, determined that NHAI’s assignment of exclusive toll collection rights to contractors for fixed consideration is a taxable supply. Up to 30.06.2012, the arrangement is covered under franchise service; post 01.07.2012, it is taxable under the negative list regime, with no exemption applicable for such contracts. All arguments based on the negative list and sovereign functions failed. The demand for service tax, interest, and penalties was affirmed, and the appeals were dismissed. Taxpayers engaged in similar arrangements must ensure compliance with service tax provisions, both under the earlier and current regimes.

02-06-2026 (2026) TaxCorp(ST) 43288 (CESTAT-CHENNAI)

CESTAT Chennai Quashes Double Service Tax Demand on Subcontractor: Upholds Non-Liability of Sub-Contracted Transport Arranger under GTA Reverse Charge - The Tribunal conclusively held that the appellant, acting purely as a sub-contractor arranging transport on behalf of M/s. Aspinwall & Co. Pvt. Ltd., did not incur service tax liability as a GTA or as the person liable to pay freight under reverse charge. The absence of direct dealings with cargo owners, lack of consignment note issuance, and full reimbursement by the principal contractor were determinative. The service tax demand, together with interest and all associated penalties for the period 2007-08 to 2011-12, was set aside, and the appellant’s appeal was allowed in full.

21-05-2026 (2026) TaxCorp(ST) 43287 (CESTAT-NEW DELHI)

CESTAT Delhi Affirms Exemption for Sub-Contracted Earthwork and Embankment as Integral to Road Construction under Notification No. 25/2012-ST - Based on the comprehensive analysis of the exemption notification, the nature of the work performed, and binding judicial precedents, the Tribunal decisively held that the appellant’s services—comprising earthwork, embankment, and related activities—are integral to road construction and thus squarely covered by the exemption under Notification No. 25/2012-ST. The impugned order denying exemption was set aside, and the appeal was allowed, providing the appellant with consequential relief.

20-05-2026 (2026) TaxCorp(ST) 43286 (CESTAT-NEW DELHI)

CESTAT Delhi Bars Service Tax Demand on Individual Residential Units with Common Amenities Due to Limitation—Prevailing Precedent Shields Assessee from Extended Limitation - The Tribunal’s decision is actionable for assessees in similar circumstances: when a binding judicial precedent exists during the period of dispute, reliance on such precedent can provide a defense against allegations of suppression or willful misstatement, thereby barring the invocation of the extended limitation period under Section 73 of the Finance Act, 1994. Assessees should document their reliance on prevailing case law and maintain records of their legal position to defend against retrospective demands.

29-04-2026 (2026) TaxCorp(ST) 43285 (CESTAT-NEW DELHI)

No Service Tax on Corporate Guarantee Issued without Consideration; CESTAT Upholds Reverse Charge on Facilitation Fees for ECBs; CENVAT Credit Reversal Dispute Remanded for Re-examination - The CESTAT’s partial allowance of the appeal provides clear guidance: the issuance of a corporate guarantee without any consideration is not liable to service tax post-2012, following the negative list regime. However, facilitation fees paid to a foreign bank for ECBs are squarely taxable in the hands of the Indian recipient under the reverse charge mechanism, unless it can be convincingly shown that the payment is part of interest. Additionally, adjudicating authorities are mandated to provide reasoned orders addressing all cited precedents and arguments, failing which a remand is warranted.

26-06-2023 Service Tax - Order No. 09/2023

Appointment of Common Adjudicating Authority in respect of SCNs issued to units of M/s Vishnu Pouch Packaging Pvt. Ltd ...

21-03-2023 Service Tax - Orders / Instructions No. 240137/20/2022

Payment of Service Tax by the Department of Posts and Ministry of Railways by way of book adjustment ...

02-03-2023 NOTIFICATION NO. 01/2023 - SERVICE TAX

Seeks to amend Notification No. 22/2014- SERVICE TAX dated 16th September, 2014 ...

28-02-2023 Circular No. 214/1/2023-Service Tax

Leviability of Service Tax on the declared service “Agreeing to the obligation to refrain from an act, or to tolerate an act or a situation, or to do an act" under clause (e) of section 66E of the Finance Act, 1994 ...

16-12-2022 NOTIFICATION NO. 01/2022-Service Tax

Central Government directs that the service tax payable under section 66B of the Finance Act, 1994, on the “light-dues” collected by the Directorate General of Lighthouses and Lightships under the Lighthouse Act, 1927, in the said period, but for the said practice, shall not be required to be paid. ...

05-11-2019 Service Tax - Circular No. 122/41/2019

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 ...

05-07-2019 Circular 213/3/2019 -Service Tax

Provisions in the Cenvat Credit Rules 2004 regarding reversal of credit ...

22-05-2019 Notification No. F.NO. 137/14/2018-Service Tax

CORRIGENDUM - Notification No. 1/2019-Service Tax dated the 6th March, 2019 ...

21-05-2019 Circular 212/2/2019-Service Tax

Taxability of the service of access to a road or bridge in the period 8-11-2016 to 1-12-2016 ...

06-03-2019 NOTIFICATION No. 1/2019-Service Tax

Exempting services provided by project implementation agencies under the DDUGKY for the period commencing from the 1st of July,2012 and ending with the 29th of February, 2016 ...

15-01-2019 Circular No. 211/1/2019-Service Tax

Applicability of Service Tax on Asian Development Bank (ADB) and International Finance Corporation (IFC) ...

30-11-2018 Notification No. 1/2018-Service Tax

Exempting the payment of Service Tax on services by way of granting of right of way by local authorities for the period commencing from the 1st of July, 2012 and ending with the 30th of June, 2017 ...

30-05-2018 Circular 210/2/2018-Service Tax

Applicability of service tax on ambulance services provided to government by private service providers under the National Health Mission (NHM) ...

04-05-2018 Circular No. 209/1/2018-Service Tax

Applicability of the Place of Provision of Services Rules, 2012 (POPS) to development of software and services on software ...

01-02-2018 D.O.F. No. 334/04/2018-TRU

Union Budget 2018 - Changes in Service Tax. ...

News & Views

Article - The Demise of the "Game of Skill" Defence in GST Jurisprudence

Article - GST and Online Gaming in India: Supreme Court’s New Framework and Its Implications

Article - GST Implications on 'Buy One Get One' (BOGO) Offers: Free Units, Credit Notes, and Proper Adjustment Strategies

Article - Mastering GST Scrutiny: Strategic Handling of Form GST ASMT-10 to Prevent Litigation

Article - Section 107 and the Prohibition of Remand: No Second Chances for the Department under GST

Article - Analysis of Sections 14 and 171 of the CGST Act in the Context of Battery Operated Vehicle Procurement: Insights from the CAG Compliance Audit Report

Article - GST Implications on Corporate Guarantees: Analysis of Bombay High Court’s Position on Absence of Consideration

Article - Artificial Intelligence and Taxation: Re-examining the Legal Framework for Assessing Value Creation

Article - GST on Online Gaming in India: A Comprehensive Legal and Economic Overhaul

Article - GST Implications on Corporate Guarantees: Key Developments and Practical Guidance after D.P. Jain & Co. Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India

Article - Supreme Court Clarifies Governing Provisions for Pre-Deposit Refunds under GST: Section 115 Prevails Over Section 54

Article - Upcoming Changes in Consolidation of Financial Years in Input Tax Credit (ITC) Notices: A New Approach?

Article - Transforming Statutory Audits with GST Data

Article - Understanding the Cross Objection Conundrum before the GST Appellate Tribunal: Procedural Gaps and Implications

Article - Section 16(2)(c) Under Scrutiny: An In-depth Review of Gujarat High Court’s Verdict on GST Input Tax Credit

Article - GST and Contractual Damages: Delineating the Taxability of Settlement Payments in Breach of Contract Cases

Article - ITC Apportionment and the GST Dilemma

Article - Determining the Deadline for Issuing GST Show Cause Notices for FY 2020–2021: 28th or 30th November 2024?

Article - Judicial Acceptance of Consolidated Show Cause Notices under GST: Karnataka High Court’s Landmark Decision

Article - Section 16(2)(c) of CGST Act: Gujarat High Court’s Awaited Decision and Its National Impact

Page 1 of 249 (4979 items)12 3 4 5 6 7…247 248 249

14-06-2026 (2026) TaxCorp(IDT) 12449 (GST)

HC : Madras High Court Quashes GST Assessment for AY 2024–25: SCN Issued Under Section 74 Held Without Authority Where Proceedings Had to Be Under Section 74A

12-06-2026 (2026) TaxCorp(IDT) 12447 (GST)

HC : Madras High Court Invalidates Assessment Order Issued Against Deceased Taxpayer; Permits Fresh Proceedings Against Legal Heirs

12-06-2026 (2026) TaxCorp(IDT) 12446 (GST)

ITAT : Madras High Court Quashes Best Judgment Assessment under Section 62, Directs Revenue to Reassess Considering Subsequently Filed Returns

12-06-2026 (2026) TaxCorp(IDT) 12445 (GST)

HC : Madras High Court Nullifies GST Demand and Penalty under Section 74 Owing to Lack of Hearing and Prima Facie Non-Applicability of Registration Threshold

12-06-2026 (2026) TaxCorp(IDT) 12444 (GST)

HC : Madras High Court Quashes ITC Denial for Late Return Filing in Light of Section 16(5) Amendments; Orders Passed Under Section 16(4) Limitation Held Unsustainable

12-06-2026 (2026) TaxCorp(IDT) 12443 (GST)

HC : Madras High Court Quashes ITC Demand, Orders Fresh Inquiry Where Supplier’s Tax Compliance is Evident Despite Missing Transport Documents

12-06-2026 (2026) TaxCorp(IDT) 12442 (GST)

HC : Madras High Court Remands GST Penalty Order under Section 74 for Fresh Review; Opportunity Allowed to Prove Genuine Supply and Wrongful Invocation

12-06-2026 (2026) TaxCorp(IDT) 12441 (GST)

HC : Bombay High Court Declares Consolidated GST Show-Cause Notice and Recovery Order Void for Lack of Jurisdiction—Permits Fresh Proceedings under Proper Provisions

12-06-2026 (2026) TaxCorp(IDT) 12440 (GST)

HC : Madras High Court Nullifies GST Assessment on Seigniorage Fees, Directs Fresh Proceedings Subject to Supreme Court Verdict

12-06-2026 (2026) TaxCorp(IDT) 12439 (GST)

HC : Gauhati High Court Upholds Validity of Consolidated Notices and Orders for Multiple Financial Years under GST; Assessees' Plea on Prejudice and Limitation Rejected

12-06-2026 (2026) TaxCorp(IDT) 12438 (GST)

GSTAT : GSTAT Delhi Affirms No Profiteering by Arun Excello Constructions LLP in “Compact Homes-Narmada” Project Due to Absence of Incremental ITC Benefit

12-06-2026 (2026) TaxCorp(IDT) 12437 (GST)

GSTAT : GSTAT Upholds Rs. 13.61 Crore Profiteering by Lifestyle International Pvt. Ltd. for Failing to Pass on GST Rate Reduction to Customers; No Interest or Penalty Levied

12-06-2026 (2026) TaxCorp(IDT) 12436 (GST)

HC : Allahabad High Court Declares Arrest and Remand under CGST Act Illegal for Absence of Mandatory DIN and Procedural Safeguards

12-06-2026 (2026) TaxCorp(IDT) 12435 (GST)

HC : Gauhati High Court Affirms Retrospective Penalty on Partners for GST Evasion: Partners Held Personally Liable under Section 122(1A) CGST Act

12-06-2026 (2026) TaxCorp(IDT) 12434 (GST)

HC : Orissa High Court Quashes GST Appellate Order for Failure to Consider Assessee’s Timely Reply on Limitation Issue

12-06-2026 (2026) TaxCorp(IDT) 12433 (GST)

HC : Gauhati High Court Quashes GST Assessment for Lack of Proper Show Cause Notice: Summary DRC-01 Held Insufficient to Initiate Proceedings under Section 73

12-06-2026 (2026) TaxCorp(IDT) 12432 (GST)

HC : Kerala High Court Rules ISD Registration Not Mandatory for ITC Distribution Prior to April 1, 2025; Quashes GST Demand and Penalty on Cross-Charge Transactions

12-06-2026 (2026) TaxCorp(IDT) 12431 (GST)

HC : Kerala High Court Upholds Detention of Arecanut Consignment and Vehicle Pending Title Adjudication Under GST Law

12-06-2026 (2026) TaxCorp(IDT) 12430 (GST)

HC : Gauhati High Court Quashes GST Demand on Bona Fide Purchaser Where Supplier Defaults on Tax Deposit, Reiterates Department’s Remedy Against Defaulting Seller

12-06-2026 (2026) TaxCorp(IDT) 12429 (GST)

HC : Bombay High Court Sets Aside GST Refund Rejection for IT Exporter Due to Absence of Reasoned Order; Remands Case for Fresh Adjudication

12-06-2026 (2026) TaxCorp(IDT) 12428 (GST)

HC : Allahabad HC Quashes ITC Blocking for Lack of “Reason to Believe” Under Rule 86-A of UP GST Rules in Mohan Milkfoods Case

09-06-2026 (2026) TaxCorp(IDT) 12427 (GST)

GSTAT : GSTAT Delhi Declares Procurement Support Services from Dow Europe as 'Import of Services', Rejects Intermediary Service Claim for IGST Refund

09-06-2026 (2026) TaxCorp(IDT) 12426 (GST)

HC : Allahabad High Court Upholds Validity of CGST Authority’s Show-Cause Notice under Health Security and National Security Cess Rules Despite Rubber Stamp Error: Pan Masala Manufacturer Denied Pre-emptive…

09-06-2026 (2026) TaxCorp(IDT) 12425 (GST)

HC : Rajasthan High Court Upholds DGGI Authority to Seal Premises and Attach Bank Accounts in Absence of Assessee’s Cooperation During CGST Investigation

09-06-2026 (2026) TaxCorp(IDT) 12424 (GST)

AAR : Kerala AAAR Confirms GST Liability on Wetland Conversion Fees, Restricts Advance Ruling to Prospective Transactions Only

09-06-2026 (2026) TaxCorp(IDT) 12423 (GST)

HC : Gauhati High Court Restores GST Registration Citing Failure to Issue Proper 30-Day Show Cause Notice under Rule 21A(2A)(b) for Violation of Rule 10A

09-06-2026 (2026) TaxCorp(IDT) 12422 (GST)

HC : Meghalaya High Court Denies Writ Relief on GST Annuity Demand, Directs Jorabat Shillong Expressway Ltd. to Exhaust Statutory Appeal Route

12-06-2026 (2026) TaxCorp(IDT) 12421 (GST)

AAR : Brake Hoses Used in Vehicle Braking Systems Classified as Vulcanized Rubber Tubes under HSN 4009; Haryana AAAR Rules 18% GST Applicable, Overturning Earlier AAR Ruling

06-06-2026 (2026) TaxCorp(IDT) 12420 (GST)

GSTAT : GSTAT Delhi Upholds Rs. 1.72 Crore Profiteering by Nandi Infratech Pvt. Ltd. in AMAATRA HOMES Project; Orders 18% Interest on Excess Collection for Non-Passing of ITC Benefits

06-06-2026 (2026) TaxCorp(IDT) 12419 (GST)

GSTAT : Delhi GSTAT Orders Vasavi and GP Infra LLP to Refund Profiteered ITC Benefit and GST to Homebuyers with 18% Interest; Compliance with Section 171 and Rule 133(3)(b) of CGST Rules Mandated

TaxCorp Search

Premium Search Enginge with intelligence built in. Guaranteed to give relevant judgments/orders within top 5 search results.

Service Tax Highlights

TaxCorp Search

Top Tax Stories

Search Categories

Search In Decisions

Search in Circulars

Search in Service Tax Ready Reckoner

Top Categories

Decisions (SC/HC/AAR/CESTAT)

Judgments (SC/HC/AAR)

CESTAT Orders

Decisions: STR

Decisions: TIOL

Decisions: Taxmann.com

Decisions: TMI

Decisions: STT

Decisions: TaxCorp(ST)

LandMark Decisions

Digests

Finance Act, 1994

Service Tax Rules

Circulars and Notifications

News & Views

Cenvat Credit Ready Reckoner

Service Tax Ready Reckoner

Service Tax Negative List

Declared Services

Service Tax Reverse Charge

Taxation of Services an Education Guide

Service Tax Ready Reckoner (Old Law)

Service Tax Procedure (Old Law)

About TaxCorp

Announcements

Useful Links

Contact Us