GOVERNMENT OF GOA Department of Finance Revenue & Control Division --- Notification 38/1/2017-Fin(R&C)(279)/26745 In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (2) of Section 171 of the Goa Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (Goa Act 4 of 2017), the Government of Goa, on the recommendations of the Goods and Services Tax Council, hereby appoints the 1st day of April, 2025 as the date from which the Authority referred to in the said Section shall not accept any request for examin... ... ...

The cumulative value of merchandise exports during April-August 2026-27 was US$ 215.91 Billion, as compared to US$ 183.21 Billion during April-August 2025-26, registering a positive growth of 17.85% The cumulative Non-Petroleum exports in April-August 2026-27 valued at US$ 180.61 Billion registered an increase of 14.39% as compared to US$ 157.89 Billion in April-August 2025-26 Major drivers of merchandise exports growth in August 2026 include Electronic Goods, Petroleum Products, Engineeri... ... ...

GOVERNMENT OF GOA Department of Finance Revenue & Control Division --- Notification 38/1/2017-Fin(R&C)(278)/26744 In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (2) of Section 171 of the Goa Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (Goa Act 4 of 2017) read with sub-section (1) and second proviso to sub-section (5) of Section 109 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (12 of 2017) (hereinafter referred to as the CGST Act), the Government of Goa, on the recommendations of the G... ... ...

Mumbai, Sep 16 (PTI) The rupee fell 3 paise to 95.91 against the US dollar in early trade on Wednesday, facing pressure from a strong American currency and outflow of foreign funds. Positive domestic equity markets, however, supported the local currency, even as crude oil prices remained elevated amid heightened tension in West Asia, forex traders said. At the interbank foreign exchange market, the rupee opened at 95.89 against the US dollar and fell further to 95.91, trading 3 paise low... ... ...

The investigation concerned alleged fraudulent availment and passing on of inadmissible input tax credit through bogus invoices. Multiple suppliers were identified as non-existent, non-functional, suspended or cancelled, while field verification indicated an absence of genuine business activity at certain declared premises. Input tax credit was allegedly availed without receipt of goods and passed on through invoices without corresponding supplies. Statements recorded during investigation led to the arrest of a firm partner under the CGST Act.

UPI person-to-person transactions remain free irrespective of value, and person-to-merchant payments up to Rs.2,000 remain outside the merchant discount rate framework. Small merchants receiving qualifying UPI QR payments under the P2PM category continue to receive zero MDR treatment. MDR applies only to specified merchant payments above the threshold, with separate treatment for essential sectors and capital-market payments. Customers are not liable for MDR, merchants must not pass it on, and UPI application providers may not levy platform fees or hidden charges. MDR revenue supports payment ecosystem participants and small-merchant UPI adoption.

Proceedings initiated under GST against an amalgamating company after it has ceased to exist are analysed as void ab initio for want of jurisdiction. Section 87 of the CGST Act is a limited deeming provision for inter se transactions during the merger transition and does not authorise notice or adjudication against a non-existent entity. Continued GST registration does not preserve juristic existence after amalgamation. Pre-merger tax liability may be pursued, subject to limitation, against the correct successor entity.

Section 74 of the CGST Act requires factual grounds for fraud, wilful misstatement, or suppression of facts with intent to evade tax before extended limitation may be invoked. Input tax credit mismatches, reconciliation differences, reporting errors, and audit objections may justify verification, but do not by themselves establish deliberate evasion. A show cause notice must identify the alleged suppression, wilfulness, and connection with tax evasion. The Proper Officer must independently assess the facts; protective demands or relabelling a time-barred discrepancy as suppression cannot replace the statutory threshold.

GST appeals may be filed in Form GST APL-01 even where a demand order shows NIL or zero demand because tax was paid before the order. Full payment under protest does not preclude a statutory appeal. In goods-detention and penalty proceedings, proper officers must consider e-way bills, invoices and transport documents produced by a claimed owner before determining liability. The discussion also stresses procedural fairness, reasoned administration and proper satisfaction of statutory conditions for invoking fraud- or suppression-based tax-demand provisions.

Direct proceedings under Section 74A may be initiated without prior return scrutiny where independent information indicates wrongful input tax credit, fictitious invoices, non-existent suppliers, or fabricated transactions. Section 61 and Rule 99 remain applicable where return scrutiny has actually been initiated and may be an important safeguard where action rests solely on return-based discrepancies. A show cause notice invoking fraud, wilful misstatement, or suppression must disclose foundational factual allegations, though their truth is determined in adjudication. Independent information permits direct initiation, not determination of liability without a proper hearing and evaluation of evidence.

GST portal functionality permits appeals in Form GST APL-01 against demand orders reflecting NIL or zero demand where the disputed amount was paid before the order was issued. Removal of portal validation restrictions enables taxpayers to pursue their statutory appellate remedy despite the absence of an outstanding quantified demand in the order. For GST registration or amendment in Rajasthan, rent or lease agreements for a principal or additional place of business must be registered with the Sub-Registrar; an unregistered agreement is insufficient.

GST adjudication under section 74A must preserve the taxpayer's statutory period to pay tax and applicable interest without penalty and must comply with principles of natural justice. An adjudication order made before expiry of that period, without a personal hearing, is identified as procedurally unsustainable. Taxpayers may pay undisputed tax with applicable interest within the permitted period to avoid penalty, while tax officials must issue orders only after observing statutory safeguards and should correct procedural errors when identified.

Unconditional omission of Rule 96(10) of the CGST Rules, without a saving clause, removes the legal basis for proceedings founded solely on that Rule. The relevant issue is whether a legal foundation remains after omission, not merely whether the Rule existed during the tax period or when proceedings began. Section 74 provides procedural machinery but does not create the substantive restriction under Rule 96(10). Pending demands require examination of their surviving statutory foundation; independent allegations under other provisions must be assessed separately.

Section 26E of the SARFAESI Act gives debts due to secured creditors priority over governmental dues, including State VAT, once effective from 1 September 2016. Where property was mortgaged to a bank and sold through a SARFAESI auction before certification of the VAT Department's charge, the secured creditor's prior security interest and the purchasers' title prevail over the later-recorded VAT charge. The mutation entry recording the subordinate VAT charge is liable to be removed.

Furnace Oil and Light Diesel Oil are distinct commodities where their commercial identity, technical characteristics and functional use materially differ. A tariff rate prescribed for the specific entry of Light Diesel Oil cannot be extended to Furnace Oil merely because both products are used as fuel. Relevant distinctions include composition, viscosity, distillation range, sulphur content, sedimentation, ash and water content, and end-use. Classification of Furnace Oil as Light Diesel Oil is therefore unsustainable without a specific entry covering Furnace Oil, requiring fresh classification on that basis. Constitutional objections to statutory pre-deposit requirements were left for the appellate mechanism, which could determine the classification dispute on merits.

Section 9D of the Central Excise Act requires investigation statements to be admitted through the prescribed procedure, including examination of the maker, a reasoned finding on admissibility, and cross-examination. Under Rule 14 of the CENVAT Credit Rules, recovery is confined to credit wrongly taken or utilised. Allegations that goods were not received cannot rest on untested third-party statements or general findings unconnected to the assessee. Where supplier-side manipulation is not linked to the assessee and stock verification or other corroborative evidence is absent, denial of CENVAT credit, interest and penalty is unsustainable.

Cable-laying under or alongside roads does not constitute erection, commissioning and installation service where it does not result in erection, installation or commissioning of specified plant, machinery, equipment or structures. Service-tax demands require a clear basis, taxable value, and year-wise and category-wise break-up; demands lacking these particulars are vague and unsustainable. The extended limitation period does not apply where transactions were recorded in regular books, routed through banking channels, disclosed in financial statements, and non-payment arose from a bona fide, interpretational understanding of taxability. In the absence of suppression, fraud, concealment, mala fides, or misstatement, fiscal liabilities based on such demands cannot be sustained.

Suppression of taxable receipts, understatement in ST-3 returns, non-reporting of a second unregistered firm's receipts, and unsupported threshold-exemption claims permit invocation of the extended limitation period under the service-tax regime. Service-tax liability may consequently be determined on actual taxable receipts. Cum-tax adjustment requires reliable evidence that tax was not separately collected; incomplete sample invoices covering only a negligible portion of receipts do not establish entitlement. Unutilised Cenvat credit must be timely availed through prescribed returns and supported by evidence; a claim raised at the appellate stage without fresh supporting material is not allowable. Interest and penalties remain consequentially sustainable.

Rule 3A(2) requires a claimant receiving restored property to execute a bond undertaking to produce that property before the Special Court when required. It does not require a surety to furnish a solvency certificate. Because the State Government had discontinued issuance of solvency certificates, imposing that condition was incapable of compliance and unduly onerous. The solvency-certificate condition was set aside; the claimant and surety must execute the bond fixed by the Special Court, and the claimant must undertake to refund the amount if required.

Section 17 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 permits search and seizure where an authorised officer possesses material and records reasons to believe that money-laundering, proceeds of crime, or relevant property or records are involved. Acquisition of land already vested in a local body, void cancellation of its gift deed, same-day conveyances, valuation disparity, and receipt of acquisition compensation supported that statutory threshold. Section 19 permits arrest on recorded reasons based on material indicating guilt and requires communication of arrest grounds. Recorded material concerning the cancellation, conveyance, compensation, partial refund, retained amount, and alleged concealment, together with same-day supply of arrest grounds, satisfied these safeguards.