CA Raaj Gupta

12/08/2025

03/06/2024

https://medium.com//03-06-2024-gst-appeal-process-to-be-fully-digitised-a2059b4a4222

The Goods and Services Tax Network (GSTN) is set to digitize the entire process of appeals to the GST Appellate Tribunal (GSTAT), aiming…

03/06/2024

https://medium.com//note-by-ca-raj-gupta-0f66aae9c791

Strict Compliance Required for Property Attachment under Section 83 — Bombay High Court Ruling

03/06/2024

**01.06.2024: LOWER GST TO STEM SLOWDOWN IN SALES OF LIFE INSURANCE POLICIES: INSURERS REQUEST GST COUNCIL**

03/06/2024

# # # Summary Points of CBIC Guidelines on Early Recovery Proceedings under the CGST Act, 2017

1. **Standard Recovery Period**:
- Recovery proceedings should start only after three months from the demand order's service date.

2. **Exception for Early Recovery**:
- Early recovery can be initiated if revenue is at risk, with proper justification and approval.

3. **Approval Requirement**:
- Approval from the jurisdictional Principal Commissioner/Commissioner of Central Tax is necessary.

4. **Process for Early Recovery**:
- Jurisdictional Deputy or Assistant Commissioner presents the case with justification.
- Principal Commissioner/Commissioner records reasons in writing if agreeing with early recovery.
- Reasons must be credible, thoroughly documented, and balanced against business interests.

5. **Specific Reasons for Early Recovery**:
- High risk to revenue
- Potential closure of business
- Financial instability of the taxpayer
- Potential initiation of insolvency proceedings

6. **Implementation**:
- Recovery proceedings will follow Section 79 of the CGST Act upon failure to pay within the specified early period.

7. **Objective**:
- Ensures uniformity, fairness, and balance between revenue interests and business operations.

8. **Complete Instruction Access**:
- The complete instructions can be accessed [here](https://taxo.online/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/ins-gst-no-01-2024.pdf).

---

**CA Raj Gupta**

03/06/2024

https://medium.com//summary-points-of-cbic-guidelines-on-early-recovery-proceedings-under-the-cgst-act-2017-27a2aee63e74

1. **Standard Recovery Period**:  — Recovery proceedings should start only after three months from the date of service of the demand order.

30/05/2024

https://medium.com//issuance-of-identical-orders-relating-to-same-period-by-different-officers-required-to-be-8cdc0898cb44

*By CA Raj Kumar Gupta*

30/05/2024

https://medium.com//gst-rate-rationalisation-a-step-towards-simplified-taxation-e032543fa46a

*By CA Raj Gupta*

29/05/2024

---

**Note: Government to Integrate Data Repositories to Curb GST Evasion, Fraud**

**Date: 29.05.2024**

The Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs (CBIC) is set to merge its existing database of Directorate General (DG) Systems with the Goods and Services Tax Network (GSTN) to enhance its coverage of taxpayer activities and curb tax evasion. This initiative will see GSTN becoming the primary database starting the first week of June, as per a senior official's statement to the Financial Express.

Currently, the common GST Portal developed by GSTN serves as the "front-end" of the GST-IT ecosystem, while DG (Systems) functions as the "back-end," managing tax administration tasks such as refunds, investigations, and adjudications. From June onwards, GSTN will take over back-end functions as well, streamlining operations and improving the efficiency of tax administration.

The primary motivation behind this merger is to combat tax evasion more effectively. In FY24, the Directorate General of GST Intelligence (DGGI) identified over 6,074 cases of duty evasion amounting to over Rs 2.01 trillion, which represents approximately 10% of the total GST collection for FY24. Voluntary payments accounted for Rs 26,598 crore, contributing around 1.4% of the total GST collections for the fiscal year. In FY23, 4,872 cases of GST evasion were detected, involving Rs 1.01 trillion in evaded duty, with voluntary payments of Rs 20,713 crore.

The GSTN was established as a uniform IT interface between taxpayers, the Centre, and states. It is responsible for maintaining the common GST electronic portal, facilitating registration, filing of returns, forwarding returns to central and state authorities, and managing the computation and settlement of Integrated GST (IGST).

On the other hand, DG (Systems) aims to infuse technology into departmental processes, providing data support to CBIC and field formations by compiling and disseminating data related to tax collection and associated activities such as adjudication, appeals, and court cases.

According to the official, merging the two databases will enhance coordination between Central GST (CGST) and State GST (SGST) officers, improving their ability to track down tax evaders and thereby strengthening the overall tax compliance framework.

**Source:** The Financial Express

---

This note summarizes the key points from the article, highlighting the planned integration of databases to curb GST evasion and improve tax administration efficiency.

**Note: Government to Integrate Data Repositories to Curb GST Evasion, Fraud**

29/05/2024

---

**Orissa High Court Judgment Summary**

**Date: 29.05.2024**

**Case: Samarth Commodities Merchants (P.) Ltd. v. Commissioner, GST & Central Excise**

**Case Number: W.P.(C) NO.8586 OF 2024**

**Judgment Date: 15.04.2024**

**Judgment by: Orissa High Court**

**Subject: Income from shares has been excluded by virtue of Circular No. 196/08/2023-GST, hence beyond the purview of GST**

The Orissa High Court, in the case of **Samarth Commodities Merchants (P.) Ltd. v. Commissioner, GST & Central Excise**, vide W.P.(C) NO.8586 OF 2024 dated 15.04.2024, has ruled that if income from shares is indeed excluded by the Circular No. 196/08/2023-GST dated July 17, 2023, then the authority's assessment based on the audit report is not legally sustainable. The court's decision aligns with the judgment by the High Court of Karnataka in **M/s. Yonex India Private Limited**, which explicitly states that income from shares is not taxable. Consequently, the Orissa High Court quashed the impugned demand and order, directing the authority to reassess the matter, considering the petitioner's submissions and providing an opportunity for a hearing.

# # # Facts of the Case:

- **Petitioner:** Samarth Commodities Merchants (P.) Ltd.
- **Respondent:** Commissioner, GST & Central Excise
- **Petition:** To quash the demand arising out of GST DRC-07 and the Order-in-Original dated December 18, 2023, under Annexure-10.
- **Contend:** The petitioner argued that income from shares is not taxable under GST and is beyond its purview. Despite this, the authority issued a fresh demand, which is unsustainable in law.

# # # Petitioner's Reliance:

1. **Circular No. 196/08/2023-GST** dated July 17, 2023, issued by the Government of India, Ministry of Finance (Department of Revenue), Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs, GST Policy Wing.
2. **Judgment by the High Court of Karnataka** in M/s. Yonex India Private Limited v. Union of India & Ors.

# # # Respondent's Argument:

- The petitioner did not produce any evidence before the authority during the assessment to indicate that the income was from shares.
- The demand was determined based on an audit, and the proceeding was initiated accordingly.
- The impugned order is appealable, and the petitioner should have approached the appellate authority instead of filing a writ petition directly in the High Court.

# # # Held:

The Court considered the arguments and reviewed the records. It noted that if income from shares is indeed excluded by the Circular No. 196/08/2023-GST dated July 17, 2023, the authority's assessment based on the audit report is not legally sustainable. The judgment by the High Court of Karnataka in **M/s. Yonex India Private Limited** clearly states that income from shares is not taxable.

The demand arising out of GST DRC-07 and the Order-in-Original dated December 18, 2023, under Annexure-10, cannot be sustained in law and is therefore quashed. The matter is remitted to the same authority to hear it afresh and pass an appropriate order, giving the petitioner an opportunity for a personal hearing.

---

---

This draft provides a clear and detailed summary of the Orissa High Court's judgment, incorporating all the key elements and arguments presented in the case.

27/05/2024

Recovery measures should not be undertaken for three months after the order original is issued

Case Summary: The Madras High Court in the case of Tvl. Maxtile AAC Block v. State Tax Officer emphasized adherence to statutory timelines. Recovery measures should not be initiated prematurely, allowing taxpayers time to file appeals. The petitioner’s immovable property was attached by the department before the expiry of the three-month statutory period for appeal. The court deemed this attachment contrary to statutory provisions and directed its release.

Key Points:

The petitioner filed a writ petition seeking the release of attached immovable properties due to a discrepancy in GST returns.

The attachment was executed before the expiry of the three-month appeal period.

The court held the attachment as premature, citing Section 107(7) of GST enactments.

Acknowledged petitioner’s timely appeal and pre-deposit, directing the release of attachment.

Emphasized adherence to statutory procedures and timelines to ensure fairness in tax administration.

Conclusion: Madras High Court’s judgment underscores the importance of following statutory timelines, safeguarding taxpayer rights and ensuring fair tax administration.