9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2020 (9) TMI 43 - HC - GSTLegality of FAQ released in January, 2018 and the Guidance Note on CGST Transitional Credit dated 14th March, 2018 - legality and validity of Section 140 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 notified on 29th January, 2019 with effect from 1st July, 2017 - as well as the provisions of Circular dated 2nd January, 2019 issued by respondent no. 2 giving retrospective/retroactive effect to Section 28(a) (d) of the Central Goods and Services Tax (Amendment) Act, 2018 with effect from 1st July, 2017. HELD THAT - Issue Notice. To await the judgment of the Division Bench of Madras High Court in SUTHERLAND GLOBAL SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED VERSUS ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER CGST AND CENTRAL EXCISE, COMMISSIONER OF CGST AND CENTRAL EXCISE, GOVERNMENT OF TAMIL NADU, UNION OF INDIA, CENTRAL BOARD OF EXCISE AND CUSTOMS, THE CHAIRMAN, GSTN 2019 (11) TMI 278 - MADRAS HIGH COURT , list on 07th December, 2020.
Issues:
1. Challenge to the legality and validity of certain provisions of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. 2. Seeking setting aside of FAQ released in January 2018 and Guidance Note on CGST Transitional Credit dated March 2018. 3. Show Cause Notice issued to the petitioner and refund application dated May 2018. Issue 1: Challenge to the legality and validity of certain provisions of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The petitioner filed a writ petition seeking to set aside the FAQ released in January 2018, the Guidance Note on CGST Transitional Credit dated March 2018, and the legality of Section 140 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. Additionally, the petitioner challenged the Circular dated January 2019 issued by respondent no. 2, giving retrospective effect to certain provisions of the Act. The petitioner also sought to set aside a Show Cause Notice issued on May 2020 and requested the refund application dated May 2018 to be allowed. The petitioner relied on a judgment of the Madras High Court in a similar case. Issue 2: Seeking setting aside of FAQ released in January 2018 and Guidance Note on CGST Transitional Credit dated March 2018. The petitioner raised concerns regarding the FAQ released in January 2018 and the Guidance Note on CGST Transitional Credit dated March 2018. These documents were challenged for their legality and validity, along with the provisions of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The petitioner aimed to have these documents set aside through the writ petition filed before the court. Issue 3: Show Cause Notice issued to the petitioner and refund application dated May 2018. The petitioner was issued a Show Cause Notice on May 2020, which was challenged in the writ petition. Additionally, the petitioner sought the allowance of a refund application dated May 2018. The court noted the pending challenge of a judgment before the Division Bench of the Madras High Court and decided to await the outcome before proceeding further. The matter was listed for the next hearing on December 7, 2020, with directions for filing counter-affidavits and rejoinder-affidavits. This detailed analysis of the judgment highlights the various issues raised by the petitioner and the court's decision to address these concerns in a systematic manner, ensuring a fair and just resolution in accordance with the law.
|
