Earlier, Notification dated 17th September 2025 had prescribed 30th June 2026 as the last date for filing appeals before the GSTAT. However, based on representations received from various stakeholders, the Government has now issued a fresh notification superseding the earlier notification.

Revised Due Date for Filing before GSTAT

As per the notification dated 30th June 2026, the following timelines shall apply:

For Appeals under Section 112(1):

• Orders communicated before 1st May 2026: Appeal can now be filed up to 31st July 2026.
• Orders communicated on or after 1st May 2026: Appeal shall be filed within three months from the date of communication of the order.

For Applications under Section 112(3):

• Orders passed before 1st February 2026: Application can now be filed up to 31st July 2026.
• Orders passed on or after 1st February 2026: Application shall be filed within six months from the date of the order.

To download the official notification, Click Here

“The site is for information purposes only and does not provide legal advice of any sort. Viewing this site, receipt of information contained on this site, or the transmission of information from or to this site does not constitute an attorney-client relationship. The information on this site is not intended to be a substitute for professional advice.”

The post Government Extends GSTAT Appeal Filing Deadline to 31st July 2026 appeared first on Tax Unplug.

Background of the Case

The petitioner challenged a GST assessment order issued in Form GST DRC-07 for FY 2022-23 along with consequential recovery proceedings initiated through Form GST DRC-16. The dispute primarily related to levy of GST at the rate of 18% on works contract services executed for a State Government department. However, the petitioner questioned the very validity of the assessment order on the ground that the DRC-07 order dated 25.07.2023 did not bear the signature of the Proper Officer. The Revenue contended that the order had already been served by uploading it on the GST portal and that the writ petition had been filed with considerable delay. The matter was therefore placed before the Andhra Pradesh High Court to determine whether an unsigned assessment order could survive in law and whether the delay in approaching the Court would disentitle the petitioner from relief.

Arguments by the Appellant (Taxpayer)

The petitioner contended that the impugned DRC-07 order was void and unenforceable as it lacked the signature of the Proper Officer. Reliance was placed on earlier decisions of the Andhra Pradesh High Court, including A.V. Bhanoji Row, SRK Enterprises and SRS Traders, wherein the Court had consistently held that an assessment order without a valid signature is legally defective and cannot be sustained. The petitioner further submitted that the assessment order had not been served through conventional means and was merely uploaded on the GST portal. It was argued that the petitioner became aware of the proceedings only subsequently and therefore the delay in approaching the Court ought not to defeat a challenge against an order suffering from a patent legal defect.

Respondent’s Response (Revenue Department)

The Revenue opposed the writ petition on the ground of delay and submitted that the petitioner had failed to explain the prolonged period between issuance of the assessment order and filing of the writ petition. The department further argued that Section 169(1)(d) of the CGST Act specifically recognizes uploading of notices and orders on the GST portal as a valid mode of service upon a registered person. Accordingly, the department contended that the petitioner could not avoid the consequences of the assessment merely by claiming lack of knowledge of the order. The Revenue therefore sought dismissal of the writ petition while defending the validity of the assessment proceedings.

Court Findings and Decision

The Andhra Pradesh High Court held that the issue was squarely covered by its earlier judgments which had categorically ruled that the absence of the Proper Officer’s signature renders an assessment order invalid and that such a defect cannot be cured under Sections 160 or 169 of the GST Act. While the Court acknowledged the department’s objection regarding delay and recognized that uploading of orders on the GST portal is generally treated as a valid mode of service, it also took note of the practical difficulties faced by taxpayers under the GST regime and the recurring disputes relating to access and awareness of portal-based communications. Balancing the interests of both parties, the Court set aside the unsigned DRC-07 assessment order and remanded the matter to the Proper Officer for fresh adjudication after providing an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. However, the relief was made subject to the condition that the petitioner deposits 20% of the disputed tax within six weeks. The Court further directed that the period during which the writ petition remained pending shall be excluded for limitation purposes and left all issues open for reconsideration by the Proper Officer.

To download official order, Click Here

“The site is for information purposes only and does not provide legal advice of any sort. Viewing this site, receipt of information contained on this site, or the transmission of information from or to this site does not constitute an attorney-client relationship. The information on this site is not intended to be a substitute for professional advice.”

The post Andhra Pradesh High Court Sets Aside Unsigned GST Assessment Order appeared first on Tax Unplug.

Background of the Case

The present writ petition before the Allahabad High Court arose from criminal proceedings initiated against an Advocate practicing in indirect taxes and corporate laws. The petitioner, an Advocate enrolled with the Bar Council of Uttar Pradesh and also an Advocate-on-Record before the Allahabad High Court, had been engaged by his client to file statutory GST appeals under Section 107 of the CGST/SGST Act against assessment orders passed under Section 74 of the GST Act involving substantial tax demands for FY 2021-22, 2022-23 and 2023-24. While filing the appeals, the petitioner utilized the assessee’s Electronic Credit Ledger and Input Tax Credit for payment of the mandatory 10% pre-deposit requirement in accordance with CBIC Circular dated 06.07.2022 and relying upon the Gujarat High Court judgment in Yasho Industries Ltd., which had also been upheld by the Supreme Court.

However, the Appellate Authority rejected the appeals on the ground that payment of pre-deposit through Electronic Credit Ledger was not maintainable. Subsequently, instead of proceeding merely against the assessee, the GST Department lodged an FIR against both the assessee and the Advocate alleging criminal conspiracy, tax evasion and financial loss to the State Exchequer. During pendency of the writ petition, a charge-sheet and cognizance order were also passed against the Advocate, which were additionally challenged before the High Court.

Arguments by the Appellant (Advocate)

The petitioner contended that he had acted purely in his professional capacity while advising and filing the statutory appeals on behalf of his client. It was argued that utilization of Input Tax Credit for payment of mandatory pre-deposit was based on a bona fide interpretation of law supported by the CBIC Circular and the judicial precedents of the Gujarat High Court and the Supreme Court in Yasho Industries Ltd.

The petitioner further submitted that even assuming the legal interpretation adopted by him was erroneous, the same could never constitute a criminal offence or conspiracy with the client. It was emphasized that the petitioner had no business connection with the assessee and merely discharged his professional obligations as an Advocate. The petitioner argued that criminal prosecution of an Advocate for legal advice or procedural actions taken during representation of a client would strike at the very independence of the legal profession and adversely affect the constitutional right of citizens to obtain legal assistance.

Respondent’s Response (GST Department/State)

The GST Department defended the FIR by alleging that the assessee had wrongfully utilized Input Tax Credit for payment of the statutory pre-deposit requirement and thereby attempted to evade tax liability. The department alleged that such actions caused financial loss to the State Exchequer and were undertaken in conspiracy between the assessee and the petitioner Advocate.

However, during the course of hearing, the learned Additional Advocate General and the Deputy Commissioner of GST were unable to satisfactorily explain the basis on which the petitioner Advocate had been implicated in the criminal proceedings merely for filing statutory appeals and adopting a particular legal interpretation regarding pre-deposit through Electronic Credit Ledger.

Court Findings and Decision

The Allahabad High Court strongly deprecated the action of the GST Department and held that the FIR, charge-sheet and cognizance proceedings against the Advocate were wholly unsustainable in law. The Court observed that an Advocate, by virtue of his profession, is entitled to represent and defend clients fearlessly and independently, irrespective of the allegations involved against such clients. Merely because an Advocate adopts a particular legal position or files proceedings on behalf of a client, he cannot be treated as a conspirator in the alleged acts of the client.

The Court further observed that criminal prosecution of Advocates for professional acts performed during legal representation would strike at the very foundation of the legal profession and undermine the constitutional protections available under Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution. The High Court specifically held that even if the GST Department believed that pre-deposit through Electronic Credit Ledger was legally impermissible, the petitioner’s action was still a professional act based on a particular interpretation of law and could never amount to criminal conspiracy.

Accordingly, the Allahabad High Court quashed the FIR, charge-sheet and cognizance order against the petitioner Advocate and held that continuation of criminal proceedings in such circumstances would amount to gross abuse of the process of law.

To download official order, Click Here

“The site is for information purposes only and does not provide legal advice of any sort. Viewing this site, receipt of information contained on this site, or the transmission of information from or to this site does not constitute an attorney-client relationship. The information on this site is not intended to be a substitute for professional advice.”

The post Allahabad High Court Quashes FIR Against GST Advocate: Filing Appeal Using ITC Cannot Amount to Criminal Conspiracy appeared first on Tax Unplug.

India’s GST framework saw one of its most significant changes at the 56th GST Council Meeting held on 3 September 2025. Along with rationalising tax slabs and simplifying the rate structure, the Council approved complete GST exemption for several essential goods and services.

These reforms aim to reduce the financial burden on households and make daily essentials—including medicines, food items, stationery, and insurance—more affordable. In this article, TaxUnplug explains the updated list of fully exempt supplies, their impact, and when these changes come into effect.

What Does “Exempt Under GST” Mean?

Under GST law, an “exempt supply” means a supply on which no GST is charged.

Key points to remember:

• No GST is payable by either the supplier or the recipient.
• Unlike zero-rated supplies (such as exports), input tax credit (ITC) is generally not available on exempt supplies.
• GST exemption directly reduces the cost of goods and services for end consumers.

Key Exemptions Announced in the 56th GST Council Meeting

The meeting approved several major exemptions with a strong focus on affordability and public welfare.

1. Health & Life Insurance

• All individual health insurance and life insurance policies, including reinsurance, are now fully exempt from GST.
• Earlier, these services attracted 18% GST.

2. Medicines & Life-Saving Drugs

• Thirty-three life-saving drugs earlier taxed at 12% have now been moved to 0% GST.
• Several specialised medicines used for rare diseases and chronic conditions, previously taxed at 5%, are also fully exempt.

3. Education Supplies & Stationery

To reduce the cost of education, several frequently used items have been fully exempted, including:

• Uncoated paper and paperboard used for exercise books, notebooks, lab books, and graph books.
• Notebooks, maps, atlases, wall maps, and globes.
• Common learning tools like erasers, pencils, pencil sharpeners, crayons, drawing charcoal, tailor’s chalk, etc.

4. Food Items / Daily Essentials

Some essential food items now enjoy nil GST, including:

• UHT milk.
• Pre-packaged and labelled chhena/paneer.
• Popular Indian breads such as chapati, roti, paratha, khakhra, and similar items.

5. Defence & Aviation-Related Imports

To strengthen domestic defence capabilities, the following imports have been exempted:

• Parts and sub-assemblies of missiles, rockets, drones, and military aircraft.
• Technical manuals and documentation required for such defence equipment.

Other Goods & Services with Major Rate Reductions (Not Fully Exempt)

• Along with exempt items, several goods have seen significant rate cuts to 5%, especially daily essentials, dairy products, and agricultural items.
• These are not completely exempt but benefit from substantially lower GST.

Effective Date of the Exemptions

• The new exemptions and rate reductions (except tobacco-related items) are effective from 22 September 2025.
  
  
• For tobacco, cigarettes, gutkha, chewing tobacco (zarda) and similar items, existing rates—including compensation cess—will continue until all pending obligations (such as compensation-cess loan repayments) are completed.

Why These Exemptions Matter

• Lower cost of living: GST-free essentials reduce the financial burden on families.
• Better affordability in health & education: Exempting insurance, medicines, and stationery gives meaningful relief to households.
• Simplified compliance: Fewer slab classifications make budgeting and billing easier for businesses.
• Enhanced social welfare: These measures help low- and middle-income groups that spend a larger share of income on essential goods.

Possible Limitations / What to Watch Out For

• No ITC benefit: Suppliers of exempt items usually cannot claim input tax credit, which may influence pricing in some sectors.
• Transitional complexities: Certain exemptions may require clarification, especially for items pending notification.
• Specification clarity: Definitions such as “individual insurance” or the exact scope of stationery items may require CBIC clarification.

How to Check If a Particular Good or Service is Exempt

1. Refer to the latest CBIC exemption notifications issued after the 56th Council meeting.
2. Verify the relevant HSN code (for goods) or SAC code (for services).
3. Check the official FAQs and explanatory notes issued by the GST Council.
4. When in doubt, consult a GST professional or tax advisor for interpretation of technical classifications.

Summary Table: Fully Exempt Items (Illustrative)

Conclusion (Goods and Services Are Fully Exempt Under GST in India?)

The 56th GST Council meeting marks a major milestone in India’s journey toward a simpler and more equitable GST system. By fully exempting goods and services in critical sectors such as healthcare, education, food essentials, and insurance, the government has prioritised affordability and public welfare.

While the absence of ITC may affect suppliers and some areas require further clarification, the reforms are widely viewed as progressive and citizen-friendly.

For individuals, businesses, and households, These changes have already started providing meaningful financial relief since 22 September 2025.

If you need help understanding how GST exemptions apply to your business transactions or product portfolio, TaxUnplug can guide you through the updated GST 2.0 rules with accurate and practical tax advice.

The information provided in above blog is for general informational only and should not be considered as legal or tax advice. Request you to please follow latest updated in reference to above details. We advise to consult with a qualified tax professional such as “Taxunplug” for all your tax needs.

The post Which Goods & Services Are Fully Exempt Under GST? appeared first on Tax Unplug.

The Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs (CBIC) has issued Circular No. 254/11/2025-GST dated 27th October 2025, to assign proper officers under key provisions of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (“CGST Act”). This move fills an important administrative gap by officially designating officers responsible for actions under the newly introduced Section 74A, Section 75(2), and Section 122, along with Rule 142(1A) of the CGST Rules, 2017.

Key Provisions Covered

Assignment of Proper Officers

CBIC, in exercise of its powers under Section 2(91) of the CGST Act and Section 20 of the IGST Act, has designated the following officers as “proper officers” for the said provisions:

Monetary Limits for Show Cause Notices and Orders

To ensure efficient workload distribution, the circular prescribes monetary thresholds for each officer level for issuance of SCNs and passing orders under Sections 74A and 122.

Note:

• Where both CGST and IGST are involved, the combined amount will determine the proper officer’s jurisdiction.

• Penalties are excluded when determining the officer for adjudication under Section 74A.

• If subsequent statements (for later periods) increase the total tax beyond the officer’s prescribed limit, the earlier SCN must be made answerable to a higher authority through a corrigendum.

• When an Audit Commissionerate issues an SCN, any follow-up statements will be made answerable to the jurisdictional adjudicating authority, not the audit officer.

Example:

If an Assistant Commissioner issues an SCN involving Rs.18 lakh CGST and Rs.25 lakh IGST (combined Rs.43 lakh), the matter exceeds Rs.20 lakh combined limit of the Superintendent, hence the Deputy/Assistant Commissioner will act as the proper officer.

Clarification for Section 75(2)

• Under Section 75(2), when a court or tribunal concludes that a fraud-based notice (u/s 74) was incorrectly issued, the matter must be re-determined as a non-fraud case (u/s 73).

• The circular clarifies that the same adjudicating officer who handled the original notice will also handle the fresh determination, maintaining continuity and preventing duplication or jurisdictional overlap.

Practical Implications

• Uniform Implementation: The circular eliminates ambiguity regarding the authority of officers under the new and existing provisions.

• Clarity in Adjudication: Monetary thresholds now guide officers in issuing SCNs and adjudicating orders, ensuring consistency.

• Alignment with FY 2024–25 onwards: Section 74A becomes operative from FY 2024–25, marking a clear shift in GST enforcement.

• Reduced Litigation: Clear designation of officers may prevent procedural disputes regarding jurisdiction.

Conclusion

This circular is a significant administrative step towards strengthening GST compliance and enforcement under the revised adjudication framework introduced by Finance (No. 2) Act, 2024. Businesses and practitioners should take note of the monetary limits, officer jurisdictions, and the applicability of Section 74A from FY 2024–25.

To download official circular, Click Here

“The site is for information purposes only and does not provide legal advice of any sort. Viewing this site, receipt of information contained on this site, or the transmission of information from or to this site does not constitute an attorney-client relationship. The information on this site is not intended to be a substitute for professional advice.”

The post CBIC Assigns Proper Officers under Sections 74A, 75(2) & 122 of CGST Act | Circular No. 254/11/2025-GST Explained appeared first on Tax Unplug.

In Supreme Court of India

Union of India vs. M/S Yasho Industries Ltd [Special Leave Petition (Civil) Diary No. 17547 of 2025]

Background of the Case

The legal dispute between the Union of India and Yasho Industries Limited originated from conflicting interpretations of Section 107(6)(b) of the CGST Act, 2017, which governs pre-deposit requirements for filing GST appeals. Yasho Industries, a manufacturer and exporter of specialty chemicals, had deposited Rs. 3.36 crore as a mandatory pre-deposit using its Electronic Credit Ledger while challenging a GST demand. However, tax authorities rejected this method, insisting the payment be made through the Electronic Cash Ledger.

The Gujarat High Court, in its October 2024 judgment, ruled in favor of Yasho Industries, holding that the Electronic Credit Ledger payment complied with the law. The Union of India, dissatisfied with this decision, appealed to the Supreme Court, seeking reversal on grounds of statutory misinterpretation.

Arguments by the Appellant (Union of India)

The Union of India contended that the Section 107(6)(b) implicitly required pre-deposits to be made in cash, not through input tax credits, to ensure revenue certainty. They argued that permitting Electronic Credit Ledger payments for pre-deposits could lead to potential misuse, as credit ledgers might contain disputed or unverified claims. Additionally, the appellant highlighted that similar cases filed by taxpayers were pending before the Supreme Court and urged the Court to tag this case with those matters for a consolidated ruling. The department maintained that the High Court’s interpretation conflicted with the legislative intent of safeguarding tax collection mechanisms.

Respondent’s Response (M/S Yasho Industries Limited)

Yasho Industries countered the appellant claims by emphasizing the Bombay High Court’s precedent in Oasis Realty and a 2022 CBIC circular, both of which explicitly allowed pre-deposits via the Electronic Credit Ledger. The respondent argued that the deletion of Rule 96(10) of the CGST Rules in 2024 had already resolved the underlying dispute, rendering the department’s appeal redundant. The respondent further pointed out that the pending cases cited by the Union were filed by taxpayers, not the Revenue, making them irrelevant to this appeal. The respondent asserted that the High Court’s decision aligned with GST laws and that the department’s insistence on cash payments imposed an unjust financial burden on businesses.

Court Findings and Decision

The Supreme Court upheld the Gujarat High Court’s judgment and dismissed the Union’s appeal. The Court ruled that the pre-deposit through the Electronic Credit Ledger was legally valid, as Section 107(6)(b) did not explicitly mandate cash payments. It noted that the pending cases referenced by the Revenue were materially distinct, as they involved challenges by taxpayers rather than the department. The bench also observed that the deletion of Rule 96(10) had eliminated the core controversy, making further intervention unnecessary. The judgment reinforced taxpayer-friendly interpretations of GST procedures and curtailed arbitrary revenue demands, providing clarity for similar disputes.

GST Appeal Pre-Deposit via Electronic Credit Ledger:

To download official order of Gujarat High Court, Click Here and for Supreme Court order, Click Here.“

The site is for information purposes only and does not provide legal advice of any sort. Viewing this site, receipt of information contained on this site, or the transmission of information from or to this site does not constitute an attorney-client relationship. The information on this site is not intended to be a substitute for professional advice.”

The post Supreme Court Upholds Gujarat HC Ruling: 10% Pre-Deposit for GST Appeals Can Be Paid Through Electronic Credit Ledger appeared first on Tax Unplug.

For reducing the tax disputes and to provide a big relief to the taxpayers, GST Council in its 53rd meeting held on 22nd June, 2024 had recommended for waiver of interest and penalties in the demand notices or orders issued under Section 73 of the CGST Act, 2017 (i.e. the cases not involving fraud, suppression or wilful misstatement, etc.) for the Financial years 2017-18, 2018-19 and 2019-20. To avail this waiver, the condition is that the full tax demanded is paid on or before 31.03.2025.

In view of the above, Rule 164 of CGST rules, 2017 was notified through Notification No. 20/2024 dated. 8th October 2024, effective from 1st November 2024. This rule provides procedural guidelines for the said waiver scheme.

As per the waiver scheme, if a notice or order is issued under Section 73 for the financial years 2017-18, 2018-19 and 2019-20, the taxpayers are required to file an application in FORM GST SPL-01 or FORM GST SPL-02, respectively on the common portal within three months from notified date, which is 31.03.2025.

In this regard it is to inform that Form GST SPL-01 and Form GST SPL-02 are under development and same will be made available on the common portal tentatively from the first week of January 2025. In the meantime, taxpayers are advised to pay the tax amount demanded in the notice, statement, or order issued under Section 73 on or before March 31st, 2025, to ensure that they receive the waiver benefits by paying their taxes before the deadline.

Taxpayer can pay the demanded tax amount through the “payment towards demand” facility in case of demand orders and through Form GST DRC-03 in case of notices. However, if payment has already been done through Form GST DRC-03 for any demand order then taxpayer need to link the said Form GST DRC 03 with such demand order through Form GST DRC-03A, which is now available on the common portal.

To know more about the scheme in detail, click here.

To Download the official advisory, click here.

“The site is for information purposes only and does not provide legal advice of any sort. Viewing this site, receipt of information contained on this site, or the transmission of information from or to this site does not constitute an attorney-client relationship. The information on this site is not intended to be a substitute for professional advice.”

The post Form GST SPL-01 and GST SPL-02 under Development; Expected Availability on GST Portal by January 2025 appeared first on Tax Unplug.