Service tax exemption for construction of non-commercial sports infrastructure affirmed; ancillary amenities do not render project taxable.
CESTAT found that construction services for a state-funded Mega Sports Complex did not constitute taxable Works Contract Service because the project's primary purpose was non-commercial and ancillary amenities served functional, non-commercial objectives; accordingly, service tax demands and penalties based on such classification were not supportable. (AI Summary)

Right to personal hearing: faceless assessments must provide meaningful time and a fair opportunity to respond under Section 144B.
Section 144B's faceless assessment scheme requires that no adverse directions be issued without affording a reasonable opportunity to the assessee, including personal hearings. Assessing officers must provide sufficient time to reply (the court indicated a minimum of about 21 days in ordinary cases), supply documents forming the basis of a notice when needed, conduct full enquiries addressing assessees' objections, and pass detailed, speaking orders explaining reasons for rejecting contentions. (AI Summary)

New condition introduced by circular cannot impose exemption obligations, so duty demands based solely on it are impermissible.
A circular cannot lawfully impose a new eligibility condition absent from an exemption notification; the department's attempt to make exemption contingent on production of a Bank Realization Certificate via Circular 28/2009 was not a valid basis to recover customs duty. Where Notification 57/2000 did not require the nominated agency to produce the BRC within a specified time, the duty demand founded solely on the impugned circular violated the notification's terms. (AI Summary)

Electronic credit reversal statement: portal disclosure reconciles future ITC re claims against past reversals to flag exceptions.
The article explains the Electronic Credit Reversal and Re claimed Statement on the GST portal: taxpayers should disclose opening balances of ITC that appeared in GSTR 2B but were not availed in the corresponding GSTR 3B and which are realistically re claimable. Monthly filers must cumulate reversals up to the July reporting period and quarterly filers up to April-June. The portal uses the disclosure to reconcile future re claims in GSTR 3B table 4D(1) against past reversals and may flag exceptions; disclosure does not replace statutory substantiation and the department may still verify eligibility. (AI Summary)

Registration of charge ensures lender protection and requires filing eForm CHG-1 online within the prescribed timeline.
Registration of a charge requires companies to file eForm CHG-1 with the Registrar of Companies to record security interests created or modified over corporate assets. The form, signed by both the company and the charge holder, comprises Part I (charge particulars) and Part II (charge holder details) and must be filed online with supporting instruments (such as loan agreements or sanction letters) and information on joint charge holders, together with payment of the prescribed fee within the applicable statutory timeline. (AI Summary)

GST forward charge for railways enables input tax credit utilisation and removes reverse charge for rail services.
CBIC's Notifications of 19.10.2023 implement GST Council decisions: passenger transport and motor cab rentals with fuel-included consideration taxed at 2.5% with restricted excess ITC; recreational services reclassified excluding gambling/lottery; specified services to qualifying Governmental Authorities exempted (Railways excluded); Indian Railways and certain supplies moved to forward charge to enable ITC utilisation and removed from reverse charge; bus companies excluded from ECO liability to permit ITC use; conditional refunds of accumulated ITC for construction limited while refunds allowed for non-sale civil infrastructure; select goods' GST rates adjusted; non-resident online money gaming/OIDAR suppliers must register and report. (AI Summary)

Inquiry by GST officer not a trial; registration can be cancelled if dealer fails to prove business at registered address.
An administrative GST inquiry to verify business presence at the declared premises is not a trial and need not include formal trial procedures such as cross examination. The dealer bears the burden to prove business activity or change of location; failure to substantiate occupancy can support administrative cancellation of registration after providing an opportunity to be heard. (AI Summary)

Input tax credit rules tightened for passenger transport, aligning supplier and subcontractor GST treatment and preventing inverse duty arbitrage.
Amendments by Notifications 12-20 (effective 20 October 2023) recalibrate GST incidence: restrict input tax credit on passenger transport and vehicle rental services where suppliers charge a lower rate than their input-service providers, create a statutory distinction between "Governmental Authority" and "Government Entity" with specified exemptions for services to governmental authorities, exclude Ministry of Railways from certain exemptions so its supplies are under forward charge, clarify denial of inverted-duty refunds as limited to specified residential construction supplies, adjust e commerce reverse-charge for certain organized bus operators, and revise rates and refund eligibility for specified goods including millets, molasses and polyester film used in imitation zari. (AI Summary)

Related party transaction approvals upheld as violation; proportionality review led to reduced penalties despite multiple LODR breaches.
Related party transactions entered without prior audit committee and board approval, appointments of relatives causing conflict with independence criteria, and failure by the company secretary to disclose initiation of a forensic audit were held to violate the Listing Obligations and Disclosure Requirements. Subsequent ratification did not cure the prior breach. The appellate body affirmed violations but, correcting the applicable penal framework and applying proportionality and mitigating facts, reduced the monetary penalties on the company, the independent directors, and the company secretary. (AI Summary)

Input Tax Credit: supplier non-remittance alone cannot bar ITC; recipient may substantiate claim with evidence for reassessment.
Absence of GST entries in Form GSTR-2A arising from supplier non-remittance or non-uploading is not, by itself, a lawful basis to deny Input Tax Credit where the recipient presents evidence establishing a bonafide and genuine claim; the assessment denying ITC was set aside and remitted for fresh examination of the recipient's documents and evidence, with allowance of ITC if the assessing officer, after scrutiny, is satisfied of the claim's genuineness. (AI Summary)

PAN quoting requirement: companies and firms cannot use Form 60; limited IFSC relief for eligible foreign companies.
Companies and firms are no longer permitted to furnish Form 60 in lieu of quoting PAN under Rule 114B. A narrow relaxation allows a foreign company without income chargeable in India and without PAN to furnish Form 60 only for certain transactions with an IFSC banking unit. Separately, Rules 114BA and 114BB continue to require application for PAN and quoting of PAN/Aadhaar for specified transactions, but exempt non resident or foreign companies transacting with IFSC banking units by non cash deposits/withdrawals or opening non cash credit current accounts, subject to the no India taxable income condition. (AI Summary)

Surety in a contract of guarantee exempt from moratorium, permitting encashment of an irrevocable bank guarantee during insolvency proceedings.
An irrevocable, unconditional bank guarantee given to secure raw-material financing qualifies as a surety excluded from the insolvency moratorium; the guarantor's absolute, on-demand liability permits encashment during CIRP, and the appellate tribunal set aside the adjudicating authority's restraint on invocation after finding the guarantee was not a performance bond but a financial surety. (AI Summary)

Cash ledger credit treatment as tax payment - higher authority orders must be followed and not delegated.
Whether amounts credited in the GST Cash Ledger qualify as valid tax payments is contested where taxpayers retained ledger balances after technical or filing errors and authorities raised interest demands. A High Court held that when remanding a matter to the Commissioner, the Commissioner must personally pass orders and may not delegate that duty to an Assistant Commissioner. Subordinate authorities must follow higher appellate directions unless their operation is stayed, and the Commissioner must now pass orders consistent with the remand; administrative clarification on Cash Ledger treatment is advisable. (AI Summary)

Advertisement tax on informational signboards disallowed; municipal bodies lack authority to levy such tax under municipal law.
The Supreme Court held that municipal authorities cannot levy Advertisement Tax on signboards whose primary purpose is to disseminate general business information rather than to solicit customers; such informational displays fall outside the statutory scope of taxable advertisements, and taxing them would be without legal authority and infringe constitutional protections. The Court directed the municipal authority to re-examine and dispose of objections to the show cause notice expeditiously. (AI Summary)

GST on corporate guarantees: corporate guarantees between related parties attract GST while uncompensated personal guarantees do not.
Corporate guarantees provided by a company for related parties are treated as taxable supplies under GST, with taxable value determined as the higher of actual consideration or a prescribed deemed valuation percentage of the guarantee amount. Personal guarantees furnished by directors in their individual capacity are not taxable when no consideration flows from the company; if the company pays consideration to the director, the open market value is taxable. Reverse charge may apply where the guarantee is supplied by a director in that capacity. (AI Summary)

Tax Deduction at Source compliance: criminal liability arises unless reasonable cause is shown; deposit and delay defenses may prevail.
Failure to deposit tax deducted at source triggers penal liability under Section 276B, while Section 278B makes companies and responsible officers vicariously liable. Section 278AA provides that proof of reasonable cause for non payment bars punishment. Relevant factors include prompt deposit with interest, honest mistake, pendency of industrial sickness proceedings, and undue delay by Revenue in initiating proceedings; where such factors demonstrate reasonable cause, criminal prosecution under Sections 276B/278B may be precluded. (AI Summary)

Input tax credit compliance: DRC 01C intimations require taxpayer response or risk blocked subsequent filings.
A portal compliance regime now reconciles ITC between auto generated statements and returns, triggering Form DRC 01C intimations when claimed ITC exceeds available ITC beyond predefined limits; taxpayers must reply in Form DRC 01C Part B by payment, explanation, or both, and failure to respond will block filing of subsequent period outward supply returns. (AI Summary)

Input Tax Credit allowed on transferred duty free materials, permitting GST credit on intra and inter unit transfers.
Exporters and importers may obtain Export Obligation Discharge Certificates for Advance Authorisations and EPCG via a designated disposal facility; Regional Authorities must generate EODC letters online where physical files were earlier submitted and must update redeemed authorisation statuses. Online EODCs are electronically transmitted to the Customs transmission system to facilitate discharge of Customs bonds. Separately, where duty free imported or indigenously procured materials on which GST has been paid are transferred between company units in the same or different States, Input Tax Credit is allowed and governed by GST law and applicable rules. (AI Summary)

Common intention v common object: altering charges without notice prejudices accused; proof of common intention required for joint liability.
The article explains that common intention arises from a pre-existing agreement or meeting of minds and must be proved as a distinct mental element, whereas common object denotes the shared goal of participants in an unlawful assembly and may be established during the commission of the act; substitution of liability based on common intention without adequate proof or notice to the accused may prejudice the accused and ought not to be permitted. (AI Summary)

Governmental authority exemption: service tax not leviable on construction services to qualifying public bodies.
Service tax is not leviable on services provided to a Governmental Authority that falls within the exemption notification: either an authority set up by an Act of Parliament or State Legislature, or an entity established by government with ninety percent or more participation to carry out functions entrusted to municipalities under Article 243W; the statutory disjunction was read to keep legislative bodies and government-established bodies as distinct branches, and administrative clarifications cannot override the statutory text. (AI Summary)