<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2024 (8) TMI 634 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=756930</link>
    <description>The HC granted interim protection to a distribution licensee challenging a SCN issued under Section 74 of CGST Act, 2017. The petitioner claimed exemption for electricity services under notification dated 28th June, 2017. The court found that respondent relied on a circular dated 1st March, 2018, which was declared ultra vires to Section 8 and notification no. 12/2017-CT(R). The HC held that the circular cannot clarify the exemption notification issued under Section 11(1) as it is an independent document. The petitioner established a prima facie case and jurisdictional issue, warranting interim protection. The court directed participation in proceedings but prohibited final orders without court leave.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 11 Jun 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 08 May 2025 16:01:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=763817" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (8) TMI 634 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=756930</link>
      <description>The HC granted interim protection to a distribution licensee challenging a SCN issued under Section 74 of CGST Act, 2017. The petitioner claimed exemption for electricity services under notification dated 28th June, 2017. The court found that respondent relied on a circular dated 1st March, 2018, which was declared ultra vires to Section 8 and notification no. 12/2017-CT(R). The HC held that the circular cannot clarify the exemption notification issued under Section 11(1) as it is an independent document. The petitioner established a prima facie case and jurisdictional issue, warranting interim protection. The court directed participation in proceedings but prohibited final orders without court leave.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 11 Jun 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=756930</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>