Burning Issues on GST Registration..!!

Thoughts, Insight and Research by: Abhishek Raja Ram, 9810638155

Q1. Is having more than one GST registration at the same address permissible?
A1. YES, AAR-Kerala in Spacelance Office Solutions P Ltd. In re (2019) 108 taxmann com 234 The applicant was engaged in sub-leasing of office spaces as 'co-working spaces'. There were multiple companies functioning from same address with distinct desk numbers (with co-working spaces i.e. shared office space). It was held that each company can obtain separate GST registration with respective desk number (As per this principle, it can be cabin number also).

In the era of #AI, here are some essential Excel tips and formulas for tax professionals.

Ready to Enhance Your Excel Mastery?
These Excel tricks can make daily tax tasks (TDS, GST, ITR data compilation) more efficient and less error-prone.

Bookmark or share this post with your fellow professionals—every support matters!

1. IF and Nested IF for TDS Calculation

Why Use It?
- Automate TDS rate calculations based on income slabs or transaction types.

Formula:
=IF(condition, value_if_true, value_if_false)
For multiple conditions, you can nest IFs.

Example:
If income > ₹5,00,000, TDS = 10%
Else if income > ₹2,50,000, TDS = 5%
Otherwise 0%
=IF(A2>500000, 0.10, IF(A2>250000, 0.05, 0)) 2. SUMIF / SUMIFS for GST Calculations

Why Use It?
- Consolidate taxable value or total tax amount based on specific criteria like GST rate or invoice category.

Formula:
=SUMIF(range, criteria, [sum_range]) =SUMIFS(sum_range, criteria_range1, criteria1, [criteria_range2, criteria2], ...)

Example (SUMIFS):
Calculate the total GST collected from invoices in January (Column B for invoice month) at 18% GST rate (Column C for GST%):

=SUMIFS(D:D, B:B, "January", C:C, 18%)

Depositing tax is essential when GST officials visit your premises—an open secret. Regardless of what the law states, the practical scenario remains the same: a search or inspection.

Thoughts, Insight and Research by: Abhishek Raja Ram, 9810638155
Please follow me for similar research work..

Here are some judgments that might help you: 1. Payment made under GST before adjudication of tax liability during revenue officials visit cannot be treated as voluntary and is refundable with interest.
Bombay High Court in Shiva Structures Pvt. Ltd.
(2025) 26 CENTAX 157

𝗡𝗔𝗙𝗥𝗔 𝗜𝗺𝗽𝗼𝘀𝗲𝘀 𝗣𝗲𝗻𝗮𝗹𝘁𝘆 𝗼𝗻 𝗖𝗔 𝗡𝗲𝗲𝗿𝗮𝗷 𝗕𝗮𝗻𝘀𝗮𝗹 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝗣𝗿𝗼𝗳𝗲𝘀𝘀𝗶𝗼𝗻𝗮𝗹 𝗠𝗶𝘀𝗰𝗼𝗻𝗱𝘂𝗰𝘁 𝗶𝗻 𝗥𝗲𝗹𝗶𝗴𝗮𝗿𝗲 𝗙𝗶𝗻𝘃𝗲𝘀𝘁 𝗔𝘂𝗱𝗶𝘁

𝗦𝘂𝗺𝗺𝗮𝗿𝘆 𝗼𝗳 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗢𝗿𝗱𝗲𝗿 𝗣𝗮𝘀𝘀𝗲𝗱 𝗯𝘆 𝗡𝗔𝗙𝗥𝗔 (𝗡𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝗮𝗹 𝗙𝗶𝗻𝗮𝗻𝗰𝗶𝗮𝗹 𝗥𝗲𝗽𝗼𝗿𝘁𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗔𝘂𝘁𝗵𝗼𝗿𝗶𝘁𝘆)
𝗖𝗮𝘀𝗲: Religare Finvest Limited vs. CA Neeraj Bansal (FY 2017-18) 𝗙𝗮𝘂𝗹𝘁 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗟𝗲𝗴𝗮𝗹 𝗕𝗮𝘀𝗶𝘀
The National Financial Reporting Authority (NAFRA) issued an order against CA Neeraj Bansal, a partner at SCV & Co. LLP, for professional misconduct in his role as the Statutory Auditor of Religare Finvest Limited (RFL) for the financial year 2017-18.

Due to delayed TRAN-1 functionality, the Assessee paid GST in cash instead of using transitional credit, and the Madras High Court allowed a refund upon revising GSTR-3B.

Dell International Services India Pvt. Ltd. vs Union of India [W. P. No. 1924 of 2021; dated 02-Jan-2025: 2025:MHC:251] ➡️Facts of the case:
🔹The Assessee had accumulated “Input Tax Credit (ITC)” under the pre-GST regime.
🔹 GST came into force on 01.07.2017, but the “Form TRAN-1” portal was enabled only on 25.08.2017.
🔹 The Assessee filed its TRAN-1 belatedly on 27.12.2017, by which time it had partly discharged its output GST liability in cash and partly by fresh ITC earned under GST.
🔹 The Department passed an order stating there was no provision to revise “GSTR-3B” for July to November 2017.

Constitution and GST Registration

Thoughts, Insight and Research by: Abhishek Raja Ram, 9810638155

Despite its unique structure, GST registrations and the law governing them remain subject to the overarching principles and provisions enshrined in the Constitution of India. This note examines the applicability of key constitutional articles to GST registrations. 1. Article Article 14: Equality before the law

Applicability: Article 14 guarantees equality before the law and equal protection of the laws within the territory of India. In the context of GST, this implies that the registration process, criteria, and related provisions must be non-discriminatory and apply uniformly to all similarly situated individuals and entities.

𝗣𝗲𝗻𝗮𝗹𝘁𝘆 𝗜𝗺𝗽𝗼𝘀𝗲𝗱 𝗼𝗻 𝗧𝗣𝗜 𝗜𝗻𝗱𝗶𝗮 𝗟𝗶𝗺𝗶𝘁𝗲𝗱 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝗡𝗼𝗻-𝗖𝗼𝗺𝗽𝗹𝗶𝗮𝗻𝗰𝗲 𝘄𝗶𝘁𝗵 𝗪𝗼𝗺𝗮𝗻 𝗗𝗶𝗿𝗲𝗰𝘁𝗼𝗿 𝗔𝗽𝗽𝗼𝗶𝗻𝘁𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁 𝗥𝗲𝗾𝘂𝗶𝗿𝗲𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁
𝗦𝘂𝗺𝗺𝗮𝗿𝘆 𝗼𝗳 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗢𝗿𝗱𝗲𝗿 𝗣𝗮𝘀𝘀𝗲𝗱 𝗯𝘆 𝗥𝗢𝗖

𝗙𝗮𝘂𝗹𝘁 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗟𝗲𝗴𝗮𝗹 𝗕𝗮𝘀𝗶𝘀
The Registrar of Companies (ROC), Mumbai, issued a penalty order against TPI India Limited under Section 454 of the Companies Act, 2013, for violating Section 149(1) and Rule 3 of Companies (Appointment and Qualification of Directors) Rules, 2014. 𝗦𝗲𝗰𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝟭𝟰𝟵(𝟭): Mandates that listed companies must appoint at least one woman director.

𝗥𝘂𝗹𝗲 𝟯: Requires filling any intermittent vacancy of a woman director within three months or by the next board meeting, whichever is earlier.

UNJUST ENRICHMENT: A Deep Dive

Thoughts, Insight and Research by: Abhishek Raja Ram, 9810638155

1. Shapoorji Pallonji & Co. Pvt. Ltd. - Andhra Pradesh High Court
TS-873-HC(AP)-2024-GST

Principle of unjust enrichment does not apply to refund of electronic cash ledger in terms of section 49(6) read with section 54. HC sets aside rejection of refund claim for left over TDS accumulated as credit balance in cash ledger with a direction for ‘reconsideration’. 2. M/s NAM Estates Pvt. Ltd. - Karnataka High Court
2025-VIL-39-KAR
Respondent contracted for goods and paid an advance including GST. The supplier didn't deliver, so the contract was canceled. The respondent then applied for a GST refund.
HELD: Tax is on the transaction, so if it fails, advance payments should be refunded. With no GST liability, the respondent is entitled to a refund.

"RECTIFICATION IN RETURNS"

GST returns lack a revision option, and since humans are prone to errors, mistakes will inevitably occur. While the Department's decision to reject rectification might be legally valid, it goes against the spirit of the law. Laws should not be designed to penalize individuals for honest mistakes.

Here are a few judgments where courts have favoured the assessee.

Research by: Abhishek Raja Ram; 9810638155 1. M/s Vijay Bhogilal - Gujarat High Court
(2024) 12 TMI 1399 :: 2024:GujHC:70800-DB

Error in GSTR-3B returns for 2018-19: The case is remanded to the respondent authority, allowing the petitioner to apply for Input Tax Credit entitlement by 30-Nov-2021. The Assessing Officer will issue a new order after reviewing the petitioner's application per Sections 16(5) and 16(6) of the GST Act.

Summary of GSTR-9 & GSTR-9C Reporting Requirements for FY 2023-24
(Updated as per Notification No. 12/2024 – Central Tax dated 11/07/2024)

A. GSTR-9: Annual Return
A.1. GSTR-9 Tables: Mandatory Tables/Section
4A to 4G: Taxable outward supplies, tax on advances, and RCM. • 4I to 4L: Credit/Debit Notes (CN/DN) and amendments related to supplies reported in 4B to 4E.

• A to 5C: Zero-rated supplies without tax payment, supplies where the recipient discharges tax.

• 6E: Import of goods.

• 6F to 6M: Other ITC details.

📰 𝗞𝗮𝗿𝗻𝗮𝘁𝗮𝗸𝗮 𝗛𝗶𝗴𝗵 𝗖𝗼𝘂𝗿𝘁 𝗥𝘂𝗹𝗶𝗻𝗴: 𝗥𝘀. 𝟮𝟭,𝟬𝟬𝟬 𝗖𝗿𝗼𝗿𝗲 𝗚𝗦𝗧 𝗗𝗲𝗺𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗤𝘂𝗮𝘀𝗵𝗲𝗱 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝗢𝗻𝗹𝗶𝗻𝗲 𝗚𝗮𝗺𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗖𝗼𝗺𝗽𝗮𝗻𝘆 📢 The court ruled, "Games such as rummy, which are predominantly skill-based, cannot be taxed under the 'gambling and betting' category, and are therefore not subject to the GST rate applied to gambling."

𝗖𝗘𝗦𝗧𝗔𝗧 𝗛𝘆𝗱𝗲𝗿𝗮𝗯𝗮𝗱 𝗥𝘂𝗹𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗼𝗻 𝗦𝗲𝗿𝘃𝗶𝗰𝗲 𝗧𝗮𝘅 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗦𝘁𝗮𝘁𝘂𝘁𝗼𝗿𝘆 𝗥𝗲𝗰𝗼𝗿𝗱𝘀

📢 The Tribunal ruled: "Demand of service tax cannot be confirmed merely based on figures in statutory records; the Department must prove the service was rendered."

𝗚𝗢𝗩𝗘𝗥𝗡𝗠𝗘𝗡𝗧 𝗢𝗙 𝗜𝗡𝗗𝗜𝗔 𝗔𝗺𝗲𝗻𝗱𝘀 𝗡𝗼𝘁𝗶𝗳𝗶𝗰𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝗠𝗲𝘁𝗮𝗹 𝗦𝗰𝗿𝗮𝗽 𝗧𝗿𝗮𝗻𝘀𝗮𝗰𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝘀

📢 New Tax Regulation Introduced: "Registered persons involved in the supply of metal scrap, under Chapters 72 to 81 of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975, are now subject to GST collection regulations starting October 10, 2024."

🚨 Karnataka High Court Quashes Common Show Cause Notice (SCN) for Multiple Tax Periods: "Fundamentally Flawed" 🚨

Veremax Technologie Services Limited Vs The Assistant Commissioner Of Central Tax The Karnataka High Court has held that issuing a consolidated SCN for multiple Assessment Years (AYs) is "fundamentally flawed" and contravenes the provisions of the CGST Act.

"BURDEN OF PROOF"

We usually believe that burden of proof lies on the Assessee but it's not in all cases. When the Assessing Officer levies allegations then the onus is on them

Let's decode few critical aspects of this

Bookmark/Save this post

Raja Abhishek
Your NIRC Candidate 1. Burden of proof vis-à-vis invocation of charging provisions
1.1 Ambalal Sarabhai Enterprises - Supreme Court
(1989) 43 ELT 214

Central Excise - Dutiability - Burden on the department to prove that goods were marketable hence liable to excise duty -

"REVERSAL OF ITC FROM CANCELLED DEALERS": Part-2

In the landmark judgment of State of Maharashtra vs Suresh Trading Company [(1997) 11 SCC 378], the Supreme Court held that the subsequent retrospective cancellation of the seller's registration does not affect the deduction (ITC) 2. Madras High Court
2.1 TVL. SRI ESWARI TEXTILES
(2017) 5 GSTL 256

Tamil Nadu VAT: Subsequent registration cancellation does not affect the purchasing dealer's right to a deduction.

Your GST Registration cannot be cancelled on hyper-technical grounds as GST Laws cannot override the Right to Livelihood under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.

Bookmark/Save this post for the future.

Research by: Raja Abhishek, NIRC Candidate 2024 1. Poonamchand Saran - Rajasthan High Court
2022-TIOL-1278
Assessee Cannot Be Deprived Of Its Livelihood By Cancelling The GST Registration.

"RECTIFICATION IN GST RETURNS"

To "err is human."

Mistakes, typos, double punching, incorrect data entry, and missing information are common aspects of human nature.

GST Returns can be amended but with restrictions. Therefore, High Courts have come as saviour in such cases. 1. CHINTAMANISWAR CONSTRUCTIONS PVT. LTD. - Orissa High Court
(2024) 20 CENTAX 222 :: 2024-TIOL-1124

GSTR-1 - B2B instead of B2C - By permitting Petitioner to rectify the error, there will be no loss to the Revenue - Directions issued by the High Court

Top-10: Must read recent judgments of GST

1. Delhi High Court remanded the matter as the appeal was rejected because the certified copy of the order wasn’t filed within 7 days. Reva Giant Implex LLP vs. Assistant Commissioner of CGST. 2. E-way Bill: Typographical error not indicative of tax evasion intent. Active GSTIN, residential address not adverse. Penalty quashed for lack of evidence. Allahabd High Court in NANHEY MAL MUNNA LAL VS ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER.

The Penalty Saga of Typographical Errors in E-Way Bills

Despite numerous judgments against Mobile Squad Officers imposing hefty penalties for typographical errors, the officers persist in their practices

Save d post to handle such cases effectively

Raja Abhishek
NIRC Candidate 1. Allahabad High Court
1.1 NANHEY MAL MUNNA LAL
(2024) 7 TMI 613
 Typographical error is not indicative of tax evasion intent. Active GSTIN, residential address not adverse. Penalty quashed for lack of evidence.

7 Years of GST, My Experience

"Facts matter, not truth."

There are two distinct groups of tax professionals: one who prioritizes facts and the other who values jurisprudence and law. In my seven years of experience with GST, it's become clear that the GST department frequently imposes its interpretations under the guise of the "intention of the legislature."