Latest High Courts Rulings on GST


Latest High Courts Rulings:

Online games of rummy and poker, being distinct from offline games, are considered as games of skill and not games of chance: HC
14 Nov 2023 | [2023] 156 taxmann.com 305 (Madras)[09-11-2023] 

GST : Madras HC: Online rummy and poker are also games of skill, not games of chance
• The impugned Act, in its entirety, need not be held to be ultra vires.
• It is held that the State is competent to legislate to the extent of prohibiting online gambling, i.e., games of chance, at the same time, it has got the authority to regulate online games of skill.
• The definition of "online gambling" under Section 2(i) of the impugned Act shall be read as restricted to "games of chance" and not games involving skill. Section 2(1)(iv) of the impugned Act would not be entirely valid.
• The games of rummy and poker are games of card, but are games of skill. Section 2(1)(iv) is being read down, to mean, it excludes games of skill viz., rummy and poker.
• Having held that the State has got the authority to legislate on online games of chance, as gambling would be betting on the games of chance, it is not necessary to declare Sections 7, 8 and 9 of the impugned Act as ultra vires.
• It has been authoritatively held by the Apex Court in a catena of judgments, so also this Court that the games of rummy and poker are games of skill. The State has miserably failed to demonstrate that online games of rummy and poker are different and distinct from offline games of rummy and poker.
• The apprehension expressed by the State that bots may be used or the dealer (software) would know the cards are without any substantive material. In view thereof, the Schedule under Section 23, incorporating rummy and poker as games of chance, is set aside.
• The State may make regulations as contemplated under Section 5 of the impugned Act, thereby providing reasonable regulations for the time limit, age restriction or such other restrictions in regard to playing of online games.
• Section 10 of the impugned Act may not be declared as ultra vires as it will be necessary for the State to know about the online games providers operating within its State and that they are not indulging in any games of chance. If the State comes across the usage of bots or any dubious methods in the play of games of rummy and poker, it can take action and for that purpose also it will be necessary to uphold Section 10 of the impugned Act. The State may frame regulations as contemplated under Section 5 of the impugned Act.
• In the light of the aforesaid, the writ petitions, as such, stand partly allowed. The prayer to declare the entire impugned Act of 2022 as ultra vires is negated.
• The Schedule of the impugned Act, including the games of rummy and poker, are set aside. Section 2(i) and 2(1)(iv) of the impugned Act shall be read as restricted to games of chance and not games involving skill, viz., rummy and poker.

Hon'ble Delhi High Court [2023] 153 taxmann.com 541 (Delhi) Cube Highways and Transportation Assets Advisor (P.) Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner CGST

Where services provided by the petitioner to foreign recipient included identifying potential opportunities for investments in India, analyzing investment returns and related risks, preparing reports etc., merely because foreign recipient, on basis of advisory services provided by petitioner, had made investments in entities in India, it could not be construed to mean that petitioner had rendered advisory services as an 'Intermediary'

Also, Where the petitioner had rendered advisory services to foreign party for making investments in India, petitioner's claim for refund was to be processed


Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in [2023] 153 taxmann.com 659 (Allahabad) B.L. Pahariya Medical Store v. State of U.P

A person/assessee is not required to request for "opportunity of personal hearing" and it remained mandatory upon Assessing Authority to afford such opportunity before passing an adverse order; even otherwise in the context of an assessment order creating heavy civil liability, minimal opportunity of hearing is to be granted in real terms


Hon’ble Madras High Court in [2023] 153 taxmann.com 657 (Madras) Tvl. Raja Stores v. Assistant Commissioner (ST)

Section 65 provides for a periodical audit and the authority having failed to conduct the audit during any time prior to the closure of business and cancellation of registration, could not conduct the audit after the closure of business for the period prior to closure




Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

"Turning Failures into Success: How Resilient Companies Pivot and Thrive"

Image
"Turning Failures into Success: How Resilient Companies Pivot and Thrive" Many successful companies have encountered failures along their journey, but their ability to learn from mistakes and adapt has often been a key factor in their ultimate success. Failures can provide valuable insights, prompting companies to rethink strategies, innovate, and explore new opportunities. This resilience and willingness to pivot not only helps companies survive challenging times but can also lead to breakthroughs that drive long-term success. It's a great reminder that setbacks are often stepping stones to greater achievements. It's a reminder that resilience, creativity, and a willingness to pivot are crucial elements of long-term success. These companies demonstrate that even failures can lead to later successes with perseverance and innovation! Here are some examples of foreign companies that initially launched a product that failed but later succeeded: 1. *Samsung (South Korea)*...
Read more

Discard ITR: The income tax department has introduced a new functionality on its portal.

Image
Discard Return FAQs Question 1: I filed my Original ITR u/s 139(1) on 30th July 2023 but not yet verified. Can I Discard it? Response: Yes, user can avail the option of “Discard” for the ITRs being filed u/s 139(1) /139(4) / 139(5) if they do not want to verify it. User is provided a facility to file an ITR afresh after discarding the previous unverified ITR. However, if the “ITR filed u/s 139(1)” is Discarded and the subsequent return is filed after the due date u/s 139(1), it would attract implications of belated return like 234F etc., Thus, it is advised to check whether the due date for filing the return u/s 139(1) is available or not before discarding any previously filed return. Question 2: I Discard my ITR by-mistake. Is it possible to reverse it? Response: No, if ITR is Discarded once, it can’t be reversed. Please be vigilant while availing Discarding option. If an ITR is Discarded, it means that, such ITR is not filed at all. Question 3: Where can I find “Discard option” ? Res...
Read more

GST Amnesty Scheme for interest and penalty raised under section 73

Image
Amnesty Scheme by way of waiver of interest and penalty for demands raised under Section 73 The proposal of the GST Council is to insert Section 128A to provide a waiver of interest and penalties for demand orders issued under Section 73of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 ('CGST Act'). This waiver applies to cases where taxpayers pay full tax demand by 31-03-2025. This is recommended for the financial years 2017-18, 2018-19, and 2019-20.  However, the waiver is not to be extended in the cases of erroneous refunds. This recommendation provides significant relief to taxpayers where the tax remained unpaid in non-fraud, genuine cases of non-payment or short payment, etc. Since the inception of GST, many show-cause notices and demand orders have been issued for the starting years. The accumulated amount of interest for such initial years has grown equivalent to the tax amount or even more due to the extension of the time limit for issuing orders under Section 73 for FYs...
Read more