Latest GST Judgments

For Full Access To All Latest Judgments on GST
Click Here To Subscribe Now
Take a tour of our GST Library

The Core Question, as the petitioners put it, is does the State have the legislative competence to enact section 174 and save the past taxation events-comprising levy, and recovery-when Entry 54, List Il, which is the field of legislation empowering the State, stood omitted permanently with effect from 16.09.2017? Of course, this core question engenders a few collateral questions. We will answer them all.

Shanti Prime Publication Pvt. Ltd.

Section 174 of the CGST Act, 2017—Constitutional Validity — The Petitioners prayed whether the State have the legislative competence to enact section 174 and save the past taxation events-comprising levy, and recovery-when Entry 54, List II, which is the field of legislation empowering the State, stood omitted permanently with effect from 16.09.2017. Section 174 of the Kerala Goods and Services Act, 2017, is a saving provision brought about by the State Legislature to save the transactions under the State’s various pre-GST enactments, including the KVAT Act. About that provision, the petitioners, first, maintain that Section 19 of the Constitution Amendment Act has repealed all the State laws inconsistent with the GST Laws. And they also, second, insist that the States have been denuded of the legislative power to enact Section 174 because of the amendment to Entry 54 of List II.

Held that:-The Hon’ble High Court held that the petitioners have bona fide pursued these writ petitions. The Petitioner approach a statutory authority on an issue arising out of a writ petition which now stand disposed off. The authority will exclude for limitation period, it has spent before the Court. — Sheen Golden Jewels (India) Pvt. Ltd. Vs. The State Tax Officer (IB) -1, And Others [2019] 8 TAXLOK.COM 048 (Ker)