Sec. 2(13) – Intermediary – Where services provided by petitioner to foreign recipient included identifying potential opportunities for investment in India, analysing investment returns and related risks, preparing reports etc., merely because foreign recipient, on the basis of advisory services provided by petitioner, had made investments in entities in India, it could not be construed to mean that the petitioner had rendered advisory services as an ‘intermediary’.
Cube Highways and Transportation Assets Advisors (P.) Ltd. v. Asstt. Commissioner CGST – [2023] 153 taxmann.com 541 (Delhi).
No ITC allowed if supplier did not pay GST to Government even if tax was collected from the buyer.
Aastha Enterprises v. State of Bihar – [2023] 153 taxmann.com 491 (Patna).
Time period of 60 days provided u/s 56 of GST Act is from the date of filing of application for refund to the date of credit of refund amount in taxpayer’s bank account.
Uvee Glass (P.) Ltd., In re – [2023] 153 taxmann.com 446 (AAR – RAJASTHAN).
Proper Officer cannot seize currency and other valuable assets during search u/s 67 of CGST Act as search & seizure operations are not for the purpose of seizing unaccounted income or assets.
Deepak Khandelwal v. Commissioner of CGST – [2023] 153 taxmann.com 443 (Delhi).
Customs – Government approves Mutual Recognition Arrangement (MRA) of Authorised Economic Operators between India and Australia.
Service of GST Order on GST Portal cannot be challenged being legal mode of service.
Koduvayur Constructions v. Asstt. Commissioner – [2023] 153 taxmann.com 333 (Kerala).