Ask Jurishour AI

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
tdb_templates
saswp_reviews
saswp-collections
saswp_rvs_location
tdc-review-email
web-story-font
web-story
googlesitekit_email
tds_locker
tds_email
saswp
mailpoet_page
mailpoet_email
tdcpt_tunes
tdc-review
pronamic_payment
pronamic_gateway
pronamic_pay_subscr
wpcode
HomeGSTEndorsement Requirement Can’t Apply Retrospectively: Karnataka HC Quashes GST Demand Based on...

Endorsement Requirement Can’t Apply Retrospectively: Karnataka HC Quashes GST Demand Based on Prospective SEZ Rules 

GST

Published on

By Mariya Paliwala
Endorsement Requirement Can’t Apply Retrospectively: Karnataka HC Quashes GST Demand Based on Prospective SEZ Rules

🚀 Stay Connected With JurisHour

WhatsApp X Telegram

The Karnataka High Court has quashed a Goods and Service Tax (GST) demand raised for the period July 2017 to March 2018, holding that amended Special Economic Zone(SEZ) Rules and a subsequent circular cannot be applied retrospectively. The tax authorities acted without jurisdiction by relying on requirements that came into force after the relevant tax…

Membership Required

You must be a member to access this content.

View Membership Levels

Already a member? Log in here
Mariya Paliwala
Mariya Paliwalahttps://www.jurishour.in/
Mariya is the Senior Editor at Juris Hour. She has 7+ years of experience on covering tax litigation stories from the Supreme Court, High Courts and various tribunals including CESTAT, ITAT, NCLAT, NCLT, etc. Mariya graduated from MLSU Law College, Udaipur (Raj.) with B.A.LL.B. and also holds an LL.M. She started her career as a freelance tax reporter in the leading online legal news companies.

Latest articles

Indirect Taxes

Service Tax Refund on Cancelled Flat Booking Cannot Be Rejected as Time-Barred: CESTAT

The Mumbai Bench of  Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has held...
Case Compilation

JURISHOUR | TAX LAW DAILY BULLETIN : 24 SEPTEMBER, 2026

Here’s the Tax Law Daily Bulletin for September 24, 2026.GSTNO 10% GST PENALTY PRE-DEPOSIT...
Supreme Court

Training Call Letter Is Not Appointment Order: Supreme Court Upholds Removal of Railway Protection Special Force Rakshak

The Supreme Court has held that a letter calling a selected candidate for mandatory...
Supreme Court

Sessions Court Can’t Bar Remission for Entire Life in Murder Case: Supreme Court 

The Supreme Court has held that a Sessions Court sentencing a person for murder...

More like this

Indirect Taxes

Service Tax Refund on Cancelled Flat Booking Cannot Be Rejected as Time-Barred: CESTAT

The Mumbai Bench of  Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has held...
Case Compilation

JURISHOUR | TAX LAW DAILY BULLETIN : 24 SEPTEMBER, 2026

Here’s the Tax Law Daily Bulletin for September 24, 2026.GSTNO 10% GST PENALTY PRE-DEPOSIT...
Supreme Court

Training Call Letter Is Not Appointment Order: Supreme Court Upholds Removal of Railway Protection Special Force Rakshak

The Supreme Court has held that a letter calling a selected candidate for mandatory...