Recurring questions about mobile-squad enforcement jurisdiction in transportation checks fall outside monetary limits on departmental Tribunal appeals under the litigation circular. A detention-related penalty under section 129 requires intent to evade tax. An uncorroborated driver's allegation of an undisclosed dispatch point cannot sustain the penalty where the goods match the tax invoice and e-way bill and intent to evade is not established. An operational undisclosed facility must be independently established, and penalty discretion must be exercised judicially. Lack of warehouse verification and an opportunity to cross-examine the driver undermine the evidentiary basis for penalty; suspicion cannot replace legal proof.

The disputed integrated GST input tax credit is supported by verified invoices and a chartered accountant's certificate. Payments already made towards central and state GST must be appropriated against the remaining demands. Section 73(8) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act precludes penalties when tax and interest are paid within the prescribed period after notice. The integrated GST penalty is also unsupported by the records. No tax remains due under the disputed heads, and the consequential interest demand falls.

Transit-state GST authorities may inspect interstate consignments but cannot seize goods or impose penalties under Section 129 where the goods originate and are destined outside the state, no tax incidence arises there, and the required documents support their movement. Suspected documentary deficiencies may be referred to authorities in the origin or destination state. Freedom of trade and commerce informs the distinction between inspection and penal jurisdiction. A one-day mismatch between outward dispatch documents and an internal stock-transfer invoice does not justify a penalty where valid invoices and e-way bills cover the movement and the mismatch concerns a revenue-neutral accounting sequence between registrations of the same business.

Deemed export refund claims may combine successive tax periods across financial years. The two-year limitation period under Section 54 runs from the date of furnishing the return relating to the supplies claimed, rather than merely from the period entered in the application. Form A prior intimation must be provided to the supplier and the jurisdictional officers. A supplier may claim a deemed export refund where the recipient has not availed input tax credit and furnishes the required undertaking. Statutory interest may also be payable under Section 56.

An extended-period GST notice under Section 74 requires material supporting fraud, wilful misstatement or suppression of facts with intent to evade tax; mere non-payment or erroneous self-assessment is insufficient. Disclosure of price-adjustment receipts in income-tax and GST filings, bills without GST charges and a bona fide belief in exemption do not, without supporting material, establish deliberate evasion. An unsupported notice is without jurisdiction and, where time-barred, cannot sustain related penalty, surcharge or interest. Statutory remedies do not bar a writ challenge where an authority acts without or beyond jurisdiction. The substantive GST taxability of the price adjustments remains undetermined.

Section 16(4) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 sets a limitation period for claiming input tax credit. Retrospectively applicable Section 16(5) extends the period for credit relating to financial years 2017-18 to 2020-21 where returns were filed by 30 November 2021. Claims falling within the extended period are governed by that period notwithstanding the earlier time limit under Section 16(4).

GST registration cancelled for non-filing of returns was reinstated after the portal prevented overdue filing beyond the prescribed three-year period. The overdue returns must be filed within 30 days, and tax, penalty, interest and late fees remain payable. Limitation periods under sections 73 and 74 are computed from the order date, except for financial year 2026-27, for which section 44 applies.

Prior GST payments adjusted through accepted Forms GST DRC-03A count towards the principal tax payment condition for waiver of interest and penalty. Section 128A requires payment of the entire principal tax covered by an eligible demand within the prescribed period. Where tax was previously paid through Form GST DRC-03, Rule 164 requires an adjustment application before the waiver application. The adjusted amount is credited against the demand as payment on the original intimation date. The accepted adjustments left no outstanding principal tax in the electronic liability register, satisfying the payment condition; the waiver application remains to be processed in accordance with law.

General penalties under the Uttar Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 cannot exceed the statutory maximum. The return had been filed and the late fee paid, but the general penalty imposed in connection with the return exceeded that limit. The show cause notice and penalty order were quashed in favour of the assessee.

Section 69 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 requires the Commissioner to record reasons to believe, based on credible material, concerning the specified offence and the need for arrest. Reasons recorded by an investigating officer do not replace the Commissioner's reasons, and a bare statement of belief is insufficient. The Commissioner's order and reasons must be communicated to the person arrested. Specified arrest-related communications require a document identification number, subject to recorded exceptions and subsequent regularisation.

Penalty under the general penalty provisions of the Central and Uttar Pradesh GST enactments is unjustified for belated filing of returns where the applicable statutory late fee has been paid and there is no finding of deliberate delay. The relevant conditions are payment of the late fee and the absence of a finding that the delay was deliberate.

The deadline for replying to a show cause notice must precede the personal hearing under the procedural requirement adopted from the governing precedent. Fixing both on the same day is procedurally irregular. The consent order was expressly declared non-precedential, and entitlement to input tax credit was left for fresh determination.

For the transaction governed by the Uttar Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, no e-way bill was required on 19 February 2018. The requirement to submit an e-way bill did not apply from 1 February to 31 March 2018, the period in which the transaction occurred. Penalty proceedings concerning the transaction arose under section 129 of the Act.

Interim protection from coercive steps applies until the next hearing in an anticipatory bail application concerning alleged wrongful availment, utilisation and passing on of input tax credit. The protection is conditional on the petitioner joining the investigation. Notice has been issued, and the bail application remains pending without final adjudication.

Retrospective operation of clarificatory duty drawback circulars and interest on refunded duty drawback concern All Industry Rate Duty Drawback. Related legal concepts include purposive construction, the doctrine of fairness and contemporanea expositio.

Interest on delayed refunds under the Gujarat Sales Tax regime raises the question of which interest rate applies following the commencement of Gujarat Value Added Tax. The doctrine of merger concerns the relationship between an original assessment and its correction on appeal, with appellate correction giving legal shape to the assessment.

GST arrest under Section 69 of the CGST Act requires the Commissioner personally to form and record reasons to believe, based on credible material, concerning the specified offence, the requisite intent and the justification for arrest. The reasons must identify the underlying material, show due application of mind and be communicated to the arrestee; a bare recital is insufficient. Grounds of arrest and reasons to believe require an electronically generated Document Identification Number, subject to limited exceptions and prescribed regularisation. Inclusion in an arrest memo does not dispense with that requirement.

Tax paid through Form GST DRC-03 with an incorrect financial year can be adjusted against the relevant demand through Form GST DRC-03A. Under Rule 142(2B) of the CGST Rules, the adjusted amount is treated as paid towards that demand on the original DRC-03 intimation date. Accepted payment adjustments and appropriation of a pre-deposit that reduce outstanding principal tax to nil satisfy the principal-tax payment condition for interest and penalty waiver under Section 128A of the CGST Act. The competent authority must consider those adjustments in the Electronic Liability Register when examining the waiver application.

Extended GST recovery under Section 74(1) requires a material-based conclusion, discernible from the show cause notice, that non-payment resulted from fraud, wilful misstatement or suppression of facts with intent to evade tax. Mere non-payment or erroneous self-assessment under a bona fide belief is insufficient, and an approaching limitation deadline cannot replace the statutory preconditions. A writ challenge under Article 226 may be maintained at the show cause stage where jurisdictional conditions are absent, notwithstanding the availability of statutory remedies. An authority cannot establish jurisdiction by incorrectly determining the conditions governing its power.

Suppliers may claim refunds of tax on deemed exports when recipients have not availed input tax credit and furnish undertakings permitting the claims; both parties cannot claim refunds for the same supplies. Refund applications may combine tax periods across financial years. The two-year limitation is assessed for each supply by reference to the return relating to that supply, rather than the period entered in the application. Prior intimation in Form A is required for supplies to an export-oriented unit. An appellate order granting a refund against rejection is treated as an order under Section 54(5), and interest on refunds delayed beyond 60 days is governed by Section 56.