Raj Jaggi
CHARTERED ACCOUNTANT, COMPANY SECRETARY AND COST ACCOUNTANT
Contact Info
CA. Raj Jaggi is a Chartered Accountant based in New Delhi, primarily practising in the field of Goods and Services Tax (GST) consultancy, litigation support, and advisory services. After being associated for nearly nineteen years, from June 2007 to March 2026, with the leading indirect tax firm A.K. Batra and Associates, he has now started his own independent professional practice with a focused specialization in GST consultancy and allied indirect tax matters.
Over the years, he has developed a strong inclination towards professional writing, research, and analytical commentary on evolving issues under GST and indirect taxation laws. During the past one year alone, more than 180 of his articles have been published on various reputed online tax and professional platforms such as CAclubIndia, VATINFOLINE, VILDirect, and TaxTMI. In addition, a few of his professional articles have also been published in The Chartered Accountant Magazine as well as in the December 2025 issue of the NIRC Newsletter of ICAI.
His writing style combines legal analysis with practical insight, lucid narration, and motivational reflections, making complex GST provisions easier to understand for professionals, students, and industry readers alike. Besides writing on Indirect Taxes, he occasionally writes on a wide range of other topics such as motivational, related to famous personalities, etc.
No issues posted by the user yet!
No replies have been made yet!
Showing 1 to 20 of 226 Results
GSTAT appeal fees should track the monetary dispute, not aggregate tax, credit, interest, and penalty consequences in one order.
Rule 110(5) of the CGST Rules, 2017 bases GSTAT appeal fees on tax or input tax credit involved, the difference in tax or input tax credit involved, or fine, fee or penalty determined in the appealed order, subject to prescribed limits. Its repeated use of "or" supports alternative, rather than automatically cumulative, computational bases. The applicable limb must follow the actual dispute, grounds and relief in appeal, not the appellant's preference. Interest, though mentioned in the no-demand proviso, is omitted from the main proportional formula. Amounts accepted and not challenged should be distinguished from amounts actually involved in appeal. (AI Summary)
Goods and Services Tax - GST
Director remuneration characterised as salary remains outside indirect tax when paid within a genuine employer-employee relationship.
Directors' remuneration paid as salary under a genuine employer-employee relationship is excluded from Service Tax and falls outside GST supply. A director's designation does not determine taxability; the relevant inquiry is the capacity in which services are rendered. Salary accounting, salary-related tax deduction, and disclosure as salary income support the employment character of payment. Form 26AS and financial statements may trigger scrutiny but cannot establish taxable value without reconciliation and verification of underlying transactions. Extended limitation requires evidence of wilful suppression or comparable culpable conduct, not merely return default or financial discrepancies. (AI Summary)
Service Tax
GSTR-2A mismatch requires verification of records and supplier compliance before input tax credit denial can be sustained.
GSTR-2A/GSTR-3B mismatches may trigger scrutiny and verification of input tax credit, but cannot alone establish wrongful availment. Final liability requires examination of reconciliation, invoices, books, electronic credit ledger, proof of receipt, and supplier-related material. Where denial relies on supplier non-payment under Section 16(2)(c), such default must be verified rather than presumed from non-reflection in GSTR-2A. A show-cause notice limits the grounds and tax heads of adjudication, while competing computations must be reconciled through a reasoned speaking order. (AI Summary)
Goods and Services Tax - GST
Section 74 suppression requires evidence of deliberate tax evasion; wrongful ITC or audit non-response alone is insufficient.
Section 74 requires specific evidence that wrongful ITC arose from fraud, wilful misstatement, or suppression of facts with intent to evade tax. Mere inadmissibility of ITC, an incorrect claim, or failure to respond during audit does not by itself establish culpable suppression. The show cause notice must disclose the factual foundation and supporting material for the alleged conduct. Information already reflected in GST returns, reconciliation statements, financial records, or portal disclosures cannot readily be treated as suppressed. A new factual basis for invoking Section 74 cannot be introduced at the appellate stage when it was absent from the original notice. (AI Summary)
Goods and Services Tax - GST
Pre-deposit timing turns on whether appellate statutes bar filing or only entertainment of an appeal.
Statutory pre-deposit conditions are mandatory, but the timing of payment depends on the governing language. Under the post-2014 Central Excise and service-tax framework, an appeal cannot be entertained without deposit, supporting curability where payment is made before appellate consideration. GST instead provides that no appeal shall be filed unless admitted liability and the prescribed deposit are paid. Delayed GST payment may therefore affect whether a valid appeal existed within limitation. Pre-deposit is security during the dispute, not final discharge of the contested liability. (AI Summary)
Goods and Services Tax - GST
Genuine input tax credit requires transaction evidence; supplier default and portal mismatch alone do not establish recipient fraud.
Input tax credit entitlement requires the recipient to establish genuine transactions through invoices, proof of receipt, transport records, and banking evidence. Supplier non-compliance or Form GSTR-2A mismatch does not automatically make credit ineligible where there is no collusion, fictitious invoicing, or sham transaction. Extended limitation under section 74 requires material particulars supporting fraud, wilful misstatement, or suppression; mechanical statutory allegations and supplier default alone cannot establish culpable conduct by the recipient. (AI Summary)
Goods and Services Tax - GST
Statutory status and commercial consideration determine service-tax exposure for land leasing and sports complex subscriptions.
Statutory status does not by itself exclude service-tax liability; taxability depends on the character of the particular activity and the consideration received. Leasing or renting land for ground rent, lease premium, or similar consideration is assessed by reference to the arrangement permitting use of immovable property, and labels such as land revenue, premium, or salami do not alter the substantive character of the receipts. Compulsory statutory levies differ from commercial consideration. Membership and subscription charges for sports-complex facilities also require independent activity-specific assessment. (AI Summary)
Service Tax
Bank-account disclosure under GST registration requires timely furnishing of a valid account, while broader disclosure remains prudent for business transactions.
Rule 10A requires bank-account particulars to be furnished within 30 days of GST registration or before GSTR-1/IFF, whichever is earlier. Its non-compliance may affect outward-supply filing and can lead to suspension or cancellation proceedings. The rule does not expressly require disclosure of all bank accounts; one valid account accepted on the portal may ordinarily suffice. Nevertheless, accounts regularly used for substantial business transactions or GST refunds should be disclosed and validated, while declared accounts that become inoperative or change should be updated. (AI Summary)
Goods and Services Tax - GST
Nil turnover alone cannot establish business discontinuance; GST registration cancellation requires verification, evidence, and independent statutory satisfaction.
Nil turnover in GST returns does not by itself establish discontinuance of business or justify cancellation of registration. Cancellation under Section 29 requires an actual statutory ground and the Proper Officer's independent satisfaction based on the real factual position. Return data may trigger scrutiny, but cannot replace verification, cogent and tangible evidence, and a factual finding that business has ceased. Documents already submitted in revocation proceedings must be considered, and procedural default cannot prove substantive discontinuance. Nil turnover may invite verification, not automatic cancellation. (AI Summary)
Goods and Services Tax - GST
Extended limitation requires pleaded foundational facts of fraud or suppression; tax discrepancies alone cannot justify proceedings beyond normal limitation.
Extended limitation is an exceptional jurisdiction, not an additional period available after normal limitation expires. A tax discrepancy or possible taxability does not establish fraud, wilful misstatement, suppression of facts, or intent to evade tax. The show cause notice must set out the factual and legal basis for both classification and extended limitation, including the specific statutory limb invoked and material supporting culpable conduct. Audit observations, return mismatches, or protective proceedings cannot replace these foundational facts. (AI Summary)
Service Tax
GST registration restoration through constitutional review may require full compliance despite expiry of the statutory appellate limitation period.
Expiry of the statutory appellate limitation does not enlarge the appellate authority's limited power to condone delay under Section 107(4). Constitutional review may nevertheless examine whether continued GST registration cancellation is disproportionate where it prevents lawful business, blocks regularisation of returns and dues, and undermines future revenue collection. Conditional restoration may require filing pending returns and payment of tax, interest, penalty and late fees. It neither waives past defaults nor grants immunity from statutory compliance, and remains dependent on the facts, taxpayer conduct, and willingness to fulfil outstanding obligations. (AI Summary)
Goods and Services Tax - GST
Demand-specific finality requires refund of GST appeal pre-deposit attributable to dropped demands despite continued challenge to surviving liability.
Demand-specific finality may attach to the portion of an appellate order that sets aside a demand where that portion is no longer challenged, even though further appeal is proposed against the surviving liability. A statutory pre-deposit is security for the disputed demand, not tax. Accordingly, the proportionate pre-deposit attributable to a dropped and concluded demand cannot be withheld merely because another portion of the original demand remains under challenge. A further appellate pre-deposit obligation for the surviving demand operates independently of the refund due for the concluded portion. (AI Summary)
Goods and Services Tax - GST
Evidentiary use of GST investigation statements requires statutory conditions, witness examination, fairness, and corroboration before proving contested facts.
Section 136 of the CGST Act governs the evidentiary use of signed statements made on appearance pursuant to a Section 70 summons when their contents are relied upon to prove facts in a prosecution for an offence. Recording a statement does not by itself establish the truth of the underlying allegation. Where the maker is available, examination before the Court and a judicial opinion on admission are required. Where statements materially support an allegation, cross-examination, retraction, and independent corroboration affect their evidentiary weight. (AI Summary)
Goods and Services Tax - GST
Extended GST limitation requires foundational facts of fraud or suppression in the notice, not merely mismatch allegations.
Section 74 of the CGST Act permits extended limitation only where fraud, wilful misstatement, or suppression of facts is supported by disclosed foundational facts. An ITC mismatch, short payment, audit objection, or general allegation of suppression may justify enquiry but cannot alone establish culpable conduct. A show-cause notice must identify the alleged withheld or misstated fact, the disclosure obligation, and its connection with the proposed tax consequence. Statutory terminology, protective demands, or later allegations cannot cure the absence of a jurisdictional basis in the notice. (AI Summary)
Goods and Services Tax - GST
Pre-amendment service-tax valuation excludes genuine client reimbursements where they are not consideration for the provider's own service.
For the period before 14.05.2015, service-tax valuation under Section 67 covered the amount charged as consideration for the taxable service, and Rule 5 could not enlarge that scope by including genuine third-party expenditure incurred for a client. Recovery of such payments was not automatically taxable merely because it passed through the service provider. Tax treatment depended on the true character of the receipt: charges for the provider's own service formed part of taxable value, while genuine client reimbursements required separate examination. Cargo-space resale margins also required assessment of whether the arrangement was principal-to-principal or agency-based. (AI Summary)
Service Tax
Independent application of mind requires tax officers to verify AI research and retain responsibility for reasoned adjudication.
GST adjudication may use AI for research, drafting assistance and organisation of material, but AI cannot replace the statutory authority's independent application of mind. AI-generated authorities, statutory propositions and summaries must be verified against authentic primary sources for accuracy, relevance, factual context and continuing legal validity. Adjudicating authorities must consider the taxpayer's cited precedents and record reasons when rejecting them. Human oversight is indispensable: the issuing officer remains responsible for the legality and reasoning of every notice or order, and AI output cannot be mechanically adopted. (AI Summary)
Goods and Services Tax - GST
GST appellate limitation begins from the relevant communicated order, requiring timely rectification proceedings to inform the appellate timeline.
GST appellate limitation requires identification of the relevant decision or order before applying the statutory filing period. A rectification application filed within the prescribed period under Section 161 and decided through a reasoned order bears directly on limitation where the appeal challenges both the original determination and the rectification decision. Rectification does not create an unlimited extension or enlarge condonation powers; an appeal may still be barred if delayed when calculated from communication of the rectification order. FORM GST APL-01 should disclose the complete procedural chronology for contextual scrutiny of limitation. (AI Summary)
Goods and Services Tax - GST
GST supply determination precedes classification, exemption and valuation, while statutory schedules define deemed supplies, exclusions and their character.
Supply is the foundational taxable event under GST and must be established before classification, exemption, valuation, time, rate or place-of-supply issues are considered. It extends beyond conventional sales to transactions such as transfer, barter, exchange, licence, rental, lease and disposal, subject to statutory conditions. Supply and taxable supply remain distinct: an exempt transaction may still be a supply. Consideration is generally required, but Schedule I recognises specified deemed supplies without consideration. Schedule II classifies an existing supply as goods or services, whereas Schedule III excludes specified activities from supply altogether. (AI Summary)
Goods and Services Tax - GST
Specific penalty charges ensure taxpayers can answer allegations, as ambiguous notices cannot be cured by final orders.
Penalty proceedings under Section 271(1)(c) require the Assessing Officer to specify whether the charge is concealment of particulars of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. These are distinct alternative defaults involving different factual bases and defences. A notice that reproduces both limbs without selecting the applicable charge leaves the assessee uncertain about the case to be met. Mere satisfaction to initiate proceedings, reference to the provision, or selection of a limb in the final penalty order cannot cure ambiguity at the satisfaction and notice stages. (AI Summary)
Income Tax
Section 74 notice drafting requires specific facts of deliberate conduct; statutory labels cannot extend tax limitation.
Section 74 may be invoked only where the show cause notice itself states material facts supporting fraud, wilful misstatement or suppression of facts. General statutory labels, investigation reports, annexures, or subsequent pleadings cannot cure a notice that fails to disclose the factual basis for deliberate wrongdoing. Tax discrepancies, disputed input tax credit, and supplier-registration issues may justify inquiry but do not automatically establish fraud. Where Section 73 is time-barred, extended limitation under Section 74 depends on a clear, specific, and factually supported allegation in the notice. (AI Summary)
Goods and Services Tax - GST
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
10 Sep 2026 
