TaxTMI Login
🎉 Festive Offer: Flat 15% off on all plans! →⚡ Don’t Miss Out: Limited-Time Offer →
TaxTMI 
Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Landmark GST Ruling: Interim Relief Granted in Reverse Charge Mechanism Challenge Under Section 9(3)</h1> <h3>Rama Reddy Palaksha Versus State Tax Officer (FAC) Krishnagiri-2 Assessment Circle</h3> HC disposed of writ petition challenging GST assessment order under reverse charge mechanism. Following precedent from a Division Bench judgment, the ... Challenge to assessment order issued under the Tamil Nadu Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 - imposition of GST under the reverse charge mechanism on the seigniorage paid by the petitioner to the Government - HELD THAT:- Reliance placed in TVL. A. VENKATACHALAM VERSUS THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (ST) [2024 (2) TMI 488 - MADRAS HIGH COURT] where it was held that 'It is made clear that there shall be no recovery of GST on royalty until the Nine Judge Constitution Bench takes a decision.' Petition disposed off. In the case before the Madras High Court, presided over by Justice Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy, the petitioner challenged an assessment order under the Tamil Nadu Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. This order imposed GST under the reverse charge mechanism on seigniorage payments made by the petitioner to the government. The respondent, represented by Mr. V. Prasanth Kiran, referenced a recent Division Bench judgment in A. Venkatachalam v. Assistant Commissioner (ST), which provided specific directions regarding similar issues.The key directives from the referenced judgment include:1. Petitioners challenging show cause notices must submit objections within four weeks of receiving the order.2. Authorities are to adjudicate these objections on merit, providing a reasonable hearing opportunity, but must hold off on final orders until a decision by the Nine Judge Constitution Bench on the nature of royalty.3. No GST recovery on royalty is to occur until the Constitution Bench's decision.4. Petitioners retain the right to seek redress, including appeals, if aggrieved post-decision.5. Challenges to notifications or circulars can proceed after the Constitution Bench's outcome.6. All legal contentions remain open for petitioners post-decision.Based on these directions, the current writ petition (W.P.No.627 of 2024) was disposed of in alignment with the aforementioned judgment, with no costs awarded, and related miscellaneous petitions were closed.
TaxTMI 
