State GST can’t act if Central GST has begun: HC

Where the   Central GST authorities have already initiated proceedings under Section 70   of the CGST Act, State GST officers are barred from initiating separate   proceedings under Section 6(2)(b) of the KGST Act. Any such parallel action   by the State is without jurisdiction and legally unsustainable.

ITC availed   on IGST paid under reverse charge for manpower supply services from   unregistered suppliers (July 2017 to October 2022) cannot be arbitrarily   denied. The matter must be reconsidered by CGST authorities in light of   Circular No. 211/5/2024-GST dated 26-06-2024 and the ruling in Toyota   Kirloskar Motor Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India.

The denial of   ITC based on time-barred claims must consider the revised position clarified   by the government through recent circulars and judicial decisions. Taxpayers   are entitled to due process before rejection of such claims.

If a taxpayer   is issued a show cause notice under Section 74 of the GST Act but contends   that the case does not involve fraud or suppression, they may seek conversion   to proceedings under Section 73. This reclassification allows access to   benefits under Section 128A Amnesty Scheme, including waiver of interest and   penalty.

In cases   involving complex legal interpretation or recent policy clarifications (such   as circulars or court decisions), taxpayers should be given the opportunity   to present their case afresh before the appropriate authority to ensure   compliance with principles of natural justice and correct application of law.

Karnataka HC   - Toyota Kirloskar Auto Parts (P.) Ltd. v. Union of India [WRIT PETITION NO.   24798 OF 2023 (T-RES)]

Source : https://x.com/BimalGST/status/1940416222019150237?t=A-2Wzy8uHDyVOPT-cayliQ&s=08