Admission of additional evidence should be sparingly allowed; appeals correct record errors, not reconstruct cases or supply missing proof.
Admission of additional evidence on appeal is confined to exceptional circumstances to avoid miscarriage of justice; appellate courts should not go beyond the lower court record and may admit extra evidence only to remove a real lacuna or when the record is inadequate to pronounce a satisfactory judgment. Lack of due diligence, tactical omission, negligence, inadvertence, or the mere significance of a document do not justify admission. The same restrictive principle governs GST tribunals, so parties must present complete grounds and evidence at the adjudicatory stage. (AI Summary)

Provisional attachment under Section 83 cannot be renewed after expiry, barring reissuance without fresh statutory authority.
Provisional attachment under Section 83 CGST is a time limited, draconian pre emptive power that requires a formed opinion tied to protecting government revenue, compliance with prescribed procedures, and an order in writing. Subsection (2)'s one year cessation is decisive; reissuance or renewal of a lapsed attachment on substantially the same grounds is impermissible absent statutory authority or changed circumstances, and executive measures cannot supplant the statute. (AI Summary)

Service of notices by email: registered electronic contacts can constitute valid service, but adequacy is fact specific.
Service of notices sent to the e-mail address and mobile number provided at GST registration is a valid mode of service when exchanged under an electronic-communication agreement; electronic records entering the designated computer resource are deemed received and, where dispatched from the originator's place of business, are deemed received at the addressee's place of business. An incorrect or inaccessible e-mail address may be a defence assessed on facts, and departments must take reasonable steps to ensure meaningful receipt while taxpayers must keep contact details updated. (AI Summary)

Non-obstante clause precedence: denial of input tax credit for late return filing viewed as arbitrary and punitive.
The legal issue is whether Section 16(2) (a non obstante clause) overrides Section 16(4), which limits Input Tax Credit for late return filing. A High Court view summarized here holds that denying ITC after taxpayers paid suppliers and statutory fees and interest is arbitrary and punitive, as it nullifies the entitlement under the non obstante provision. The commentary warns against treating non obstante clauses as unlimited overrides and suggests Section 16(4) might instead be an additional compatible condition; careful interpretation is needed as litigation evolves. (AI Summary)

Input tax credit denial for promotional giveaways limits credit when items are treated as gifts or free samples under GST.
Input tax credit on goods procured for sales promotional activities is excluded where those goods are treated as disposed of by way of gift or free sample; promotional items such as gold coins and T shirts distributed in marketing campaigns were treated as gifts or samples and deemed ineligible for credit under the statutory exclusion. (AI Summary)

Overlapping jurisdiction: GST officer limits prevent duplicate proceedings, but intelligence-based actions may permit concurrent investigations.
The Delhi High Court held that prohibitions on overlapping proceedings aim to prevent duplicate orders but do not universally bar transfer or continuation of intelligence based investigations; appointment of territorial and pan India officers permits coordinated action where rigid application of the anti overlap rule would impede complex, multi taxpayer or cross jurisdiction inquiries, and therefore the transfers and actions in the present case were not barred by the statutory provision or the administrative circular. (AI Summary)

Exhaustion of alternate remedies prevents direct writ challenges to show cause notices absent jurisdictional or fundamental rights issues.
Writ petitions seeking to quash show cause notices cannot bypass the statutory scheme where petitioners have effective alternate remedies; disputes over entitlement to GST exemptions or nil rates are fact intensive and properly resolved through the adjudicatory and appellate mechanisms, and writ jurisdiction is confined to cases involving jurisdictional excess, breach of natural justice, or constitutional invalidity. (AI Summary)

Capital grant subsidy treated as viability gap funding, not a payment for work, so withholding under the law does not apply.
The court found that the capital grant subsidy was viability gap funding and equity-like financial assistance placed in an escrow under the concession agreement, not remuneration for physical work; consequently, the subsidy did not fall within the scope of Section 194C withholding obligations, which apply to payments made for carrying out work. (AI Summary)

Separation of powers: executive press release cannot dictate tax classification; adjudicatory bodies must decide independently.
The Ministry's Press Release classifying alcohol based hand sanitisers as disinfectants subject to 18% GST was quashed as an improper executive attempt to determine legal classification. The Court held that classification and rate determination are interpretative functions for judicial and quasi judicial authorities, which must decide independently; the Show Cause Notice was not quashed because it could have been issued independently, but authorities must now determine classification and tax rate free from executive influence. (AI Summary)

Intermediary status clarified: direct service providers to foreign principals are not intermediary services under IGST, preserving export classification.
An entity supplying services directly to a recipient outside India on a principal-to-principal basis is not an intermediary under the IGST framework. Intermediary services require arrangement or facilitation of a main supply between at least three parties. Contractual features-direct and proportionate cost recovery plus an arm's-length markup and allocation of foreign-exchange risk to the recipient-support classification as export of services rather than intermediary services. Place-of-supply rules for intermediary services feature only when the supplier or recipient is located outside India. (AI Summary)

GST on royalty payments affirmed as taxable consideration; royalty treated as consideration for mining rights, increasing compliance obligations.
GST applicability on royalty paid for mineral concessions is upheld where royalty is characterized as consideration for the grant of mining rights rather than a tax, permitting the levy of GST on royalty paid by mineral concession holders to State Governments and thereby bringing such payments within the scope of GST. (AI Summary)

Invalidation of IGST notification on ocean freight prevents separate levy on FOB and CIF import values under customs valuation
Invalidation of an IGST notification removes the power to levy IGST on ocean freight for CIF or FOB imports because customs valuation at assessment already includes cost, freight and insurance; a struck-down notification is ultra vires and cannot be applied by state authorities, preventing double taxation and jurisdictional enforcement based solely on that notification. (AI Summary)

Authentication of notices is mandatory-unsigned summaries and missing hearing particulars undermine validity of GST adjudication.
Authentication of notices and a meaningful opportunity to be heard are essential prerequisites to valid tax adjudication under the GST framework. Summaries uploaded in Forms GST DRC-01 and DRC-07 and unauthenticated attachments do not substitute for a properly issued Show Cause Notice or authenticated orders; authentication and signatures by the Proper Officer are required. Where the statutory scheme contemplates a hearing, authorities must provide a real opportunity to be heard and not rely solely on a reply provision with unspecified hearing particulars. (AI Summary)

Reverse charge mechanism: recipient not liable where supplier has paid tax and revenue received it, preventing double taxation.
Where the entirety of tax on a supply has indisputably been received by the exchequer through payment by the supplier, the recipient should not be required to pay the same tax under the reverse charge mechanism; receipt of tax by revenue precludes imposing an additional tax demand on the recipient for the same supply, avoiding double taxation even where strict adherence to payment-sharing ratios was lacking. (AI Summary)

Right to appeal survives full payment of GST demand; payment does not bar challenging the underlying assessment.
Payment of the full amount demanded under Section 129(3) of the Assam GST Act leads to deemed conclusion of proceedings related to that notice under Section 129(5), but does not extinguish the taxpayer's statutory right to file an appeal against the underlying order; payments made to secure release of confiscated goods or to avoid harassment are not admissions of liability and should not be treated as forfeiting appellate remedies. (AI Summary)

Prima facie fraud requirement: SCN must allege fraud, willful misstatement or suppression before extended limitation is invoked.
An SCN under Section 74 of the CGST Act must expressly state a prima facie satisfaction that Input Tax Credit was availed or utilized by reason of fraud, willful misstatement, or suppression of facts; without such specific allegations and supporting particulars to invoke the extended limitation period, proceedings under Section 74 are without jurisdiction and deny the taxpayer a fair opportunity to respond. (AI Summary)

Limitation for refund claims pauses when an initial GST refund application is filed; follow ups are continuations.
Subsequent refund filings made at the behest of the tax authority are continuations of the original refund application where proceedings remain pending; the limitation for a GST refund is determined from the date of the original filing, not from any follow up application. A deficiency memo requesting additional documents does not render a materially complete application non est for limitation purposes when the initial filing included the prescribed documentary evidence. Refund claims cannot be rejected without affording an opportunity of being heard as required by the rules. (AI Summary)

Input Tax Credit adjustment allowed for invoices issued to alternate GSTINs following administrative enrolment error, ensuring equitable treatment.
Dispute concerns entitlement to ITC where suppliers issued invoices using a different GSTIN assigned to the same PAN; the taxpayer relied on Circular No.183/15/2022 GST and prior judicial guidance to require administrative adjustment of eligible credit between GSTINs rather than disallowance, and to ensure equitable treatment when duplicate or incorrect GSTINs were issued. (AI Summary)

Resolution plan binding effect prevents fresh revenue claims for liabilities predating plan approval under insolvency law.
An NCLT approved resolution plan freezes and extinguishes claims not incorporated in the plan as of its approval; such claims, including statutory dues, cannot be pursued thereafter. Section 238 of the IBC gives the approved plan overriding effect over inconsistent laws, and the plan binds the corporate debtor and all creditors and stakeholders regardless of whether a particular State or authority participated in the insolvency proceedings. (AI Summary)