<?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>Section 73/74 GST Proceedings Cannot Be Based Solely on Turnover Discrepancy Without Fraud or Suppression Evidence</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=91041</link>
    <description>The HC held that initiation of proceedings under Section 73/74 of the GST Act for tax determination based solely on the discrepancy between turnover declared in the E-way bill and Form GSTR-9, absent any allegation of fraud, willful misstatement, or suppression, is impermissible. The respondent authority lacked jurisdiction to proceed under Section 73/74 without evidence of such misconduct. Furthermore, initiation under Section 74 requires a prima facie finding of fraud or suppression after preliminary investigation, which was not established. The impugned show-cause notice dated 27.12.2023, the consequential Order-in-Original dated 10.03.2024, and subsequent orders were quashed and set aside for violation of natural justice and lack of jurisdiction. The petition was allowed accordingly.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 29 Jul 2025 10:49:02 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 30 Jul 2025 02:37:47 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=839384" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Section 73/74 GST Proceedings Cannot Be Based Solely on Turnover Discrepancy Without Fraud or Suppression Evidence</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=91041</link>
      <description>The HC held that initiation of proceedings under Section 73/74 of the GST Act for tax determination based solely on the discrepancy between turnover declared in the E-way bill and Form GSTR-9, absent any allegation of fraud, willful misstatement, or suppression, is impermissible. The respondent authority lacked jurisdiction to proceed under Section 73/74 without evidence of such misconduct. Furthermore, initiation under Section 74 requires a prima facie finding of fraud or suppression after preliminary investigation, which was not established. The impugned show-cause notice dated 27.12.2023, the consequential Order-in-Original dated 10.03.2024, and subsequent orders were quashed and set aside for violation of natural justice and lack of jurisdiction. The petition was allowed accordingly.</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 29 Jul 2025 10:49:02 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=91041</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>