Rectification of GSTR 3B must follow the statutory mechanism, preventing unilateral electronic amendments and preserving ledgered ITC.
The Supreme Court held that rectification of GSTR 3B is permissible only through the statutory mechanism provided under the GST framework and that registered persons cannot unilaterally amend electronically filed returns. Eligible input tax credit remains in the electronic credit ledger and its use may be postponed until availed in subsequent returns; payment of output tax by cash, despite available credit, cannot be reversed unless law permits. Taxpayers must perform self assessment from books and invoices, and returns remain subject to verification by tax authorities. (AI Summary)

Equal protection concerns over IGST on oxygen concentrators challenge heavy taxation of medical imports during a health emergency.
Imposition of IGST on imported oxygen concentrators is challenged as revenue driven and inconsistent with Article 14, given imports made during a public health emergency. The author highlights judicial developments, a governmental stay, and administrative silence on refunds, the quashing of a customs notification, thousands of affected gifts/imports, and whether the statutory definition of drugs or related classifications includes oxygen concentrators used in treatment and prevention. (AI Summary)

Provisional attachment under GST must be a last resort, evidence based measure with mandatory reasoned orders and hearing.
Provisional attachment under GST must be a measure of last resort based on the Commissioner's reasoned opinion supported by tangible material showing that attachment is necessary to protect government revenue; statutory conditions and procedural safeguards, including addressing objections by a reasoned order and affording opportunity to be heard, must be strictly followed. Recent case law quashed attachments where there was non-application of mind, and a legislative amendment has broadened the trigger for attachment, raising concerns about potential misuse absent strict compliance with legal safeguards. (AI Summary)

Provisional attachment expanded: broader power to provisionally freeze bank accounts after initiation of GST enforcement proceedings.
The Finance Act, 2021 expands provisional attachment under Section 83(1) to permit provisional attachment of any property, including bank accounts, upon initiation of proceedings under Chapters XII, XIV or XV, replacing the prior narrower trigger tied to pendency of specific sections. It also adds persons covered by Section 122(1A) - beneficiaries of specified transactions - as liable to provisional attachment, thereby widening enforcement reach to third party recipients of allegedly evasive transactions. (AI Summary)

E-invoice requirement now mandatory for specified turnover thresholds, with HSN reporting and GSTR-1 linkage required.
From 1 April 2021, issuance of E-Invoice is mandatory for registered persons exceeding the prescribed aggregate turnover threshold, with e-invoicing linked to Form GSTR-1 reporting. Mandatory quoting of HSN/SAC codes on invoices is required according to turnover-linked digit thresholds and must be reported in GSTR-1 Table 12; incorrect or missing HSN/SAC may attract a statutory penalty. Aggregate turnover is computed on an all India basis including taxable, exempt, export and inter State supplies, excluding GST components and reverse charge inward supplies. Timelines are prescribed for opting into the Composition Scheme, claiming refunds within the statutory period, and filing annual returns, with GSTR-9 now allowed on a self certification basis and the audited reconciliation requirement removed. (AI Summary)

Extension of limitation protects transitional credit claims and urges reversal of retrospective restriction and SLP withdrawal.
The Supreme Court extended limitation periods during the COVID-19 pandemic, affecting claims for transitional credit under GST. The Finance Act, 2020 introduced a retrospective restriction on the time limit for claiming transitional credit; the CBIC implemented that restriction on 18.5.2020 and the Government filed a Special Leave Petition which obtained a stay against High Court rulings that had allowed a longer filing period. The author urges the CBIC to amend the retrospective implementation date and withdraw the SLP to honor the Supreme Court's directions and restore taxpayers' access to transitional credit relief. (AI Summary)

Availment of Input Tax Credit cannot be denied once return filed; interest cannot be levied on gross tax liability.
Compliance with the filing requirement in Section sixteen(2) and payment of any late fee fulfills the condition for availment of Input Tax Credit; accordingly, the levy of interest calculated on gross tax liability for late filing, including by retrospective amendment, is inconsistent with the statutory scheme and judicial decisions which confined interest to net tax liability. (AI Summary)

Interest on net tax liability clarified as payable after deducting input tax credit, with limited exception for post assessment payments.
Interest under the CGST charging provision applies to the tax "remained unpaid", meaning interest should be calculated on the net tax liability after deducting available input tax credit. Belated return filing does not necessarily forfeit ITC entitlement. A later proviso limits interest to net liability but excludes cases where tax is paid after initiation of assessment or recovery proceedings, a carve-out that conflicts with the plain statutory phrase and customary calculation of interest on actual tax payable. (AI Summary)

Transitional input tax credit time bar imposed retrospectively, challenging prior vested right recognition and prompting constitutional contestation.
The memorandum explains that retrospective amendments to Section 140 impose a time limit for claiming Transitional Input Tax Credit accrued before GST, thereby undermining prior judicial findings that such credit was an accrued vested property right; it contends that, unless struck down, the amendment displaces ordinary limitation principles and may be challenged on constitutional grounds including property protection and double taxation. (AI Summary)

Input tax credit entitlement: whether belated return filing defeats credit depends on statutory supersession versus time limit rules.
A central dispute is whether ITC must be reversed for late filing. One position holds that Section 16(2)'s four conditions, prefaced by a notwithstanding clause, exhaust statutory eligibility so that belatedly furnished or rectified returns still permit ITC from the date of purchase and rules cannot add conditions. The contrary position treats legislatively prescribed time limits and related provisions as substantive eligibility conditions that can bar later claims of ITC, making reversal proper where temporal requirements are not met. (AI Summary)

Input tax credit entitlement supersedes late return filing; reversal and retention challenged as unlawful under tax constitutional principles
The article argues that the notwithstanding clause in Section 16(2) makes furnishing of return the operative entitlement condition for Input Tax Credit, so that belated filing or rectification does not forfeit ITC. It treats rules as procedural and lacking power to extinguish a vested credit right, and contends that governmental retention of credit payable to a taxpayer is without legal authority and inconsistent with constitutional tax principles, citing authorities recognising ITC as a vested right. (AI Summary)

Retrospective amendment validates time limits for GST input tax credit carryforward and raises property-rights concerns under the constitution.
The retrospective insertion of the phrase "within such time" into section 140 is said to validate rule based time limits for transitional CENVAT/ITC carryforward, effectively causing lapse of credits and negating prior judicial decisions; this legislative retroactivity is argued to impinge on proprietary interests and raise constitutional property rights concerns. (AI Summary)