Tag: Madras HC

ArticleGST Article

Mere Similarity in Packaging Features Do Not Constitute a ‘Brand Name’; Exemption Allowed Where Enforceable Brand Rights Are Relinquished

byCA Bimal Jain

The Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of NarasusSaarathy Enterprises Private Limited v. Additional Commissioner of GST & Central Excise [W.P.No.6069 of 2025, order dated March 16, 2026] held that mere similarity in packaging, graphics, colour scheme, or mandatory statutory disclosures does not constitute a “brand name” for the purpose of denying GST exemption, and where the assessee has voluntarily foregone actionable claim over a brand name, exemption under Notification No. 2/2017–CT (Rate) dated June 28, 2017 cannot be denied.

ArticleGST Article

Forensic audit warranted for GST proceedings where massive discrepancy exists between GST turnover and inflated ITR turnover declared for tender qualification

byCA Bimal Jain

The Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of M/s. K.N. Raj Constructions held that considering the huge difference between bank receipts / GST-reported turnover of Rs. 27.89 crores and the turnover declared in the Income Tax portal of Rs. 166.93 crores, the assessee’s records require forensic examination by the GST Audit Wing …

ArticleGST Article

Madras HC quashes Section 74 SCN for 28% GST chargeable on on Tubes, Tyres and Flaps treated as ‘composite

byCA Bimal Jain

The Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of MRF Ltd. v. Additional Director DGGI & Anr. held that where the Petitioner voluntarily disclosed short payment on Tyres Tubes and Flaps (TTF) supply treating it as composite supply at 28% rate vide communication dated January 7, 2019 and paid entire tax with interest on February 21, 2019 before DGGI investigation, no fraud, wilful misstatement or suppression exists..