The Calcutta High Court has ruled on a critical procedural question in GST law: when goods are detained under Section 129 of the CGST Act, must authorities first determine who owns the goods before ordering their release? The Department had challenged the ownership, quality, and authenticity of tax documents for a detained consignment, raising questions about the scope of adjudication required at this stage.

The Supreme Court of India has dismissed the Revenue department's appeal against a Gujarat High Court ruling that held assignment of leasehold rights of industrial plots and buildings is not subject to GST. The High Court had determined that such transfers constitute immovable property transactions rather than taxable services, applying principles from the previous service tax regime to the current GST framework.

The Delhi High Court has partly allowed a writ petition filed by an Association of Chillies Exporters, challenging the foreclosure of the Transport and Marketing Assistance Scheme...

The Bombay High Court has clarified a crucial aspect of export incentive eligibility, examining whether goods classified as 'restricted' can still qualify for RoDTEP benefits when export is permitted under specific quota approvals. This ruling addresses the tension between restricted export classifications and the availability of government incentive schemes for exporters who obtain proper permissions.

The Ministry of Commerce and Industry has issued the Bolts, Nuts and Fasteners (Quality Control) Order, 2024 (‘new QCO'). The features of the new QCO are:

The CESTAT Hyderabad has set aside the Order-in-Original passed by Commissioner of Customs (Preventive) demanding customs duty on export of iron ore fines wherein the overseas buyer had directly paid commission...

The Bombay High Court has held that a bonafide, inadvertent error in furnishing details in a GST return needs to be recognized and permitted to be corrected by the department...

The Madras High Court has quashed a show cause notice issued under Section 76 of the CGST Act, 2017 wherein the Department had not considered the payment made by the assessee through the other...

The Chennai Bench of CESTAT examined whether diagnostic kits using Enzyme-Linked Fluorescent Assay (ELFA) technology qualify for the same customs duty and IGST exemptions granted to Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay (ELISA) kits under Indian tax notifications.

The Karnataka High Court examined whether healthcare services provided by a medical enterprise to patients through a contractual arrangement with another hospital qualify for GST exemption. The Revenue department argued for an 18% tax rate, while the assessee claimed exemption under healthcare service provisions. The Court's decision hinged on interpreting the legislative intent behind healthcare exemptions and determining whether service classification should follow contractual form or substantive nature.

The Orissa High Court has observed that the nature of refund claim in a case where tax was mistakenly paid twice...

The Ministry of Commerce and Industry has extended the benefit of Scheme for Remission of Duties and Taxes on Exported Products (‘RoDTEP')...

The Ministry of Commerce has on 17 October 2023 issued Draft Geographical Indications of Goods (Registration and Protection) (Amendment) Rules, 2023...

The Calcutta High Court's Division Bench has ruled on a critical procedural question regarding the appealability of Single Bench decisions in trademark matters.

The CESTAT Mumbai has clarified the customs classification dispute surrounding glucometers, determining whether these portable blood glucose measurement devices belong under medical instruments or chemical analysis apparatus in the Customs Tariff Act, 1975. The Tribunal's decision hinges on the fundamental operational principle of glucometers and establishes important precedent for classifying devices that serve both analytical and medical purposes.

The Delhi High Court has identified critical inconsistencies in how territorial jurisdiction is determined in intellectual property disputes, particularly those involving online transactions and e-commerce. A Single Judge has referred three fundamental questions to a Larger Bench to resolve the conflicting interpretations of the Civil Procedure Code, Trade Marks Act, and Copyright Act provisions that govern where IP suits can be filed.

The Supreme Court has established critical procedural requirements for arrests under the CGST Act, mandating that orders under Section 69 must be communicated to the accused before arrest to protect their right to seek anticipatory bail. This landmark ruling addresses the balance between investigative powers and fundamental rights to liberty, while also clarifying limitations on interim relief when pre-arrest bail petitions are dismissed as non-maintainable.

The Calcutta High Court has ruled on a critical distinction in GST proceedings regarding the timing requirements for demand orders under Section 73 of the CGST Act. When an order is digitally signed within the limitation period but uploaded to the portal after the statutory deadline, does this constitute a valid issuance or a procedural violation that invalidates the demand?

The Supreme Court has ruled on whether the assembly of imported photocopier modules in warehouses constitutes 'manufacture' under the Central Excise Act, examining the distinction between customs duty classification and excise duty liability. This case addresses the critical question of when simple assembly operations cross the threshold into manufacturing activity for tax purposes.

The GSTAT Bench at Thane has dismissed Revenue department’s appeal filed against the appellate authority’s decision allowing exemption under Sl. No. 9 of Notification No. 02/2017-CT(R) to the assessee who was using manufacturer’s name...