<?xml version="1.0" encoding="iso-8859-1" ?>
<rss version="2.0">
<channel>
<title> CAclubindia.com : judiciary</title>
<link>https://www.caclubindia.com/judiciary/</link>
<generator>https://www.caclubindia.com/</generator>
<item>
<title>Refund of Pre-deposit in VAT to be made in cash in GST Regime u/s 142(6)</title>
<link>https://www.caclubindia.com/judiciary/refund-of-pre-deposit-in-vat-to-be-made-in-cash-in-gst-regime-u-s-142-6--5960.asp</link>
<pubDate>Wed, 8 Apr 2026 10:56:11 GMT</pubDate>
<description>
<![CDATA[
The Hon'ble Madras High Court in Larsen and Toubro Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner (ST)-II [W.P. Nos. 28371, 28375 and 28378 of 2021 dated September 26, 2024]  held that any pre-deposit made under the VAT regime by debiting input tax credit (ITC) must be refunded in cash after the implementation of GST.]]>
</description>
<author>CCI Team</author>
</item>
<item>
<title>Cross-Charge Mechanism Valid for Distribution of Common ITC Prior to April 01, 2025</title>
<link>https://www.caclubindia.com/judiciary/cross-charge-mechanism-valid-for-distribution-of-common-itc-prior-to-april-01-2025-5959.asp</link>
<pubDate>Tue, 7 Apr 2026 10:33:15 GMT</pubDate>
<description>
<![CDATA[
The Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of M/s. Micro Labs Limited v. Joint Commissioner of Central GST & Ors. [WP No. 8409 of 2025, order dated December 09, 2025] held that distribution of common input tax credit (ITC) through cross-charge mechanism by raising invoices under Section 31 of the]]>
</description>
<author>CCI Team</author>
</item>
<item>
<title>Summoning the Director repeatedly amounted to harassment</title>
<link>https://www.caclubindia.com/judiciary/summoning-the-director-repeatedly-amounted-to-harassment-5958.asp</link>
<pubDate>Tue, 7 Apr 2026 10:33:15 GMT</pubDate>
<description>
<![CDATA[
The Hon’ble Gauhati High Court in the case of Let’s See Tour and Travels Pvt. Ltd. &Anr. v. Union of India & Ors. [WP(C) No. 719 of 2026, order dated February 17, 2026] held that although the statutory power under Section 70 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 permits summoning any perso]]>
</description>
<author>CCI Team</author>
</item>
<item>
<title>Payment of GST Penalty "Under Protest" for release of goods - Mandatory Requirement of Speaking Order under Section 129(3)</title>
<link>https://www.caclubindia.com/judiciary/payment-of-gst-penalty-under-protest-for-release-of-goods-mandatory-requirement-of-speaking-order-under-section-129-3--5957.asp</link>
<pubDate>Mon, 6 Apr 2026 11:18:42 GMT</pubDate>
<description>
<![CDATA[
The Hon'ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of M/s Deutsche Cars Pvt. Ltd. v. State of Haryana and Others [CWP-21628 of 2025, order dated January 31, 2026] held that mere payment of penalty under protest does not conclude proceedings under Section 129(5) of the GST Act, and the Proper Offi]]>
</description>
<author>CCI Team</author>
</item>
<item>
<title>First Appellate Authority under section 107 of the CGST Act has no power to remand matters to the Adjudicating Authority</title>
<link>https://www.caclubindia.com/judiciary/first-appellate-authority-under-section-107-of-the-cgst-act-has-no-power-to-remand-matters-to-the-adjudicating-authority-5956.asp</link>
<pubDate>Mon, 6 Apr 2026 11:18:41 GMT</pubDate>
<description>
<![CDATA[
The Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in the case of M/s Anand and Anand (Law Firm) v. Principal Commissioner, Central Goods and Services Tax & Ors. [Writ Tax No. 852 of 2026 along with Writ Tax Nos. 859 of 2026, 861 of 2026 and 860 of 2026, order dated February 16, 2026] held that the Appellate Authorit]]>
</description>
<author>CCI Team</author>
</item>
<item>
<title>Uploading Order on GST Portal Alone Does Not Constitute 'Communication'</title>
<link>https://www.caclubindia.com/judiciary/uploading-order-on-gst-portal-alone-does-not-constitute-communication--5955.asp</link>
<pubDate>Fri, 3 Apr 2026 10:31:53 GMT</pubDate>
<description>
<![CDATA[
The Hon'ble Allahabad High Court in the case of Bambino Agro Industries Ltd. v. State of Uttar Pradesh and another [Writ Tax No. 2707 of 2025, order dated December 19, 2025] held that mere uploading of show cause notices or adjudication orders on the GST common portal does not by itself amount to ef]]>
</description>
<author>CCI Team</author>
</item>
<item>
<title>Service Tax Not Leviable on Legal Services Provided by Advocate to Partnership Firm of Advocates</title>
<link>https://www.caclubindia.com/judiciary/service-tax-not-leviable-on-legal-services-provided-by-advocate-to-partnership-firm-of-advocates-5954.asp</link>
<pubDate>Fri, 3 Apr 2026 10:31:53 GMT</pubDate>
<description>
<![CDATA[
The Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Manisha Rajiv Shroff v. Union of India & Ors. [Writ Petition (L)No. 1684 of 2026, order dated February 05, 2026] held that service tax was not leviable on legal services rendered by an individual advocate to a partnership firm of advocates in view of Noti]]>
</description>
<author>CCI Team</author>
</item>
<item>
<title>The GST Act doesn't allow seizure of cash under Section 67</title>
<link>https://www.caclubindia.com/judiciary/the-gst-act-doesn-t-allow-seizure-of-cash-under-section-67-5953.asp</link>
<pubDate>Sat, 28 Mar 2026 11:03:15 GMT</pubDate>
<description>
<![CDATA[
A writ petition was filed challenging the legality of the two seizure orders, through which the GST authorities seized approximately ₹1,00,00,000/- (Rupees One Crore) in cash from the premises of the Petitioner, exceeding the scope of Section 67 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (herei]]>
</description>
<author>CCI Team</author>
</item>
<item>
<title>No bar on transfer of Inter-state ITC upon amalgamation of the Company</title>
<link>https://www.caclubindia.com/judiciary/no-bar-on-transfer-of-inter-state-itc-upon-amalgamation-of-the-company-5952.asp</link>
<pubDate>Sat, 28 Mar 2026 11:03:15 GMT</pubDate>
<description>
<![CDATA[
A writ petition was filed challenging the denial of inter-state transfer of unutilized Input Tax Credit (ITC) pursuant to an NCLT-approved amalgamation, raising the legal question of whether such transfer could be denied on the ground that the transferor and transferee entities were registered in di]]>
</description>
<author>CCI Team</author>
</item>
<item>
<title>Clinical-trial services overseas treated as exports</title>
<link>https://www.caclubindia.com/judiciary/clinical-trial-services-overseas-treated-as-exports-5951.asp</link>
<pubDate>Tue, 24 Feb 2026 10:33:54 GMT</pubDate>
<description>
<![CDATA[
The Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of M/s. Iprocess Clinical Marketing Pvt. Ltd. v. Asst. Commissioner of Commercial Taxes & Anr. [WRIT PETITION NO. 10989 OF 2025 (T-RES), order dated December 08, 2025] held that clinical-trial / clinical observation study services rendered to foreign reci]]>
</description>
<author>CCI Team</author>
</item>
</channel>
</rss>
