RB Associates and Tax Matters - Blogs #GST Registration

GST on Swiggy & Zomato Orders – ITC Rules for Restaurants

Thu, 22 Jan 2026 02:57:36 +0000

Online food delivery through Swiggy and Zomato has become a major part of restaurant business. However, many restaurant owners are confused about GST liability, ITC eligibility, and return filing for these transactions.

This blog explains the GST treatment of Swiggy & Zomato orders in simple, practical terms, specifically for food & beverage businesses.

🍽️ Nature of Supply – Restaurant Service via Swiggy & Zomato

When a restaurant supplies food through Swiggy or Zomato, it is still treated as restaurant service under GST law.

Mode of supply: Online (E‑commerce Operator)
Nature of service: Food & Beverage (Restaurant Service)

Applicable GST Rate

GST @ 5%
Input Tax Credit (ITC) – NOT allowed

This condition is mandatory when supplying food through Swiggy or Zomato.

👥 Who Pays GST on Food Orders?

Under Section 9(5) of the CGST Act:

Swiggy / Zomato collects and pays 5% GST on food value to the Government
Restaurant does not pay GST on food value for online orders

However, the restaurant must still report the sales value in GST returns.

❌ ITC Not Allowed – Very Important Rule

If your business activity is only food & beverages, and you charge 5% GST, then:

No Input Tax Credit is allowed on any purchase or expense, even if GST is charged on the invoice.

This applies fully to Swiggy and Zomato orders.

🚫 ITC NOT Allowed on Swiggy & Zomato Related Expenses

Restaurants cannot claim ITC on the following expenses related to online orders:

Online Platform Expenses

Swiggy / Zomato commission
GST charged @18% on Swiggy / Zomato commission
Cancellation charges
Advertisement or promotional charges billed by platforms

Food & Kitchen Expenses

Raw materials (rice, oil, vegetables, meat, milk)
Packaging materials used for delivery
LPG / cooking gas
Kitchen equipment & repairs

Other Business Expenses

CA / accounting fees
POS or billing software
Advertising & marketing expenses
Furniture, tables, chairs, AC, refrigerator

👉 Even though GST is charged on these invoices, ITC is blocked.

📊 Example – How Settlement Works

Order value collected from customer: ₹1,000

Commission charged by Swiggy/Zomato (20%): ₹200
GST on commission @18%: ₹36

Settlement received by restaurant: ₹764

GST Treatment

Sales to be reported: ₹1,000
GST payable by restaurant: NIL
GST on commission: Expense (No ITC)

📘 How to Report Swiggy & Zomato Sales in GST Returns

GSTR‑1

Report gross food sales (before commission)
Declare under Table 15 – Supplies made through E‑commerce Operators
Mention Swiggy / Zomato GSTIN

GSTR‑3B

Show sales value under Table 3.1(c)
GST payable: NIL (already paid by ECO)
ITC tables: NIL

🚨 Common Mistakes by Restaurants

Claiming ITC on Swiggy/Zomato commission GST
Reporting only settlement amount as turnover
Missing Table 15 in GSTR‑1
Assuming ITC is allowed on CA fees or software

These errors often lead to GST notices and reversals with interest.

🧠 Simple Summary

For restaurants supplying food through Swiggy or Zomato and charging GST at 5%, Input Tax Credit is not allowed on any expense, including platform commission GST.

✅ Professional Tip

Restaurants should:

Download monthly Swiggy/Zomato reports
Reconcile gross sales vs settlements
Avoid ITC claims completely
Take professional review before filing GST returns

Unregistered Agreement to Sell – Still Valid Evidence in Court, Says Supreme Court

Mon, 06 Oct 2025 08:23:34 +0000

💡 What’s the issue?

In many property deals, people sign an agreement to sell before they do the final registration of the sale deed.

Later, one party (often the seller) refuses to complete the sale — and the buyer goes to court asking for specific performance, i.e., asking the court to order the seller to finish the deal.

But what if the agreement to sell was never registered?

Can you still show it in court and ask the judge to enforce it?

That’s exactly what happened in this case.

⚖️ What Happened in the Case

Mr. Muruganandam (the buyer) signed an agreement to sell with Mr. Muniyandi (the seller).
He claimed he paid the amount and even got possession of the property.
But the seller did not execute the sale deed (final registration).
When Muruganandam went to court, he tried to show the agreement to sell as proof.
The trial court and the High Court said:
❌ “This document is unregistered — you can’t use it as evidence.”

So, Muruganandam appealed to the Supreme Court.

🧾 Supreme Court’s Decision

The Supreme Court said the lower courts were wrong.
It clarified an important legal point:

🔹 Even if the agreement to sell is not registered,
it can be used as evidence to show that a contract existed between the buyer and the seller.
🔹 However, it cannot be used to show that the property ownership has already been transferred.

In short:
👉 You can use it to prove a promise,
❌ but not to claim ownership.

🏛️ The Law Behind It (In Simple Words)

The Supreme Court relied on Section 49 of the Registration Act, 1908.

Normally, if a document that should be registered is not registered, it cannot be shown as evidence in court.

But there’s an exception (called a proviso).
It says that an unregistered document can still be accepted as proof of a contract in a suit for specific performance.

That’s the section the Supreme Court used to help the buyer in this case.

🧠 What is “Specific Performance”?

Specific performance means asking the court to force the other party to complete the deal as promised.

So if a seller refuses to sell the property after taking money, you can ask the court to order the seller to execute the sale deed.

This is common when property prices rise and sellers try to back out of old deals.

💬 What the Court Actually Said

The Bench of Justice P.S. Narasimha and Justice Joymalya Bagchi observed:

“Even though the document is unregistered, it can be received in evidence for the limited purpose of proving the existence of a contract in a specific performance case.”

The Court allowed Muruganandam to use the unregistered agreement as evidence and sent the case back to the lower court for trial.

🏠 What This Means for You

✅ You can show an unregistered agreement to sell in court to prove there was a deal.
✅ You can use it to ask the court to order the seller to complete the sale.
❌ But you cannot claim ownership of the property with that document alone.

🪜 Example

Let’s say:

You agreed to buy land for ₹20 lakhs,
You paid ₹5 lakhs in advance,
You signed an agreement (but didn’t register it),
The seller later refused to sell.

You can still:
👉 Go to court,
👉 Show your unregistered agreement,
👉 Ask for “specific performance” — i.e., for the court to direct the seller to execute the sale deed.

The court will accept your agreement as proof that a deal existed.

⚠️ Important Reminder

While this judgment helps genuine buyers, it doesn’t mean registration is unnecessary.
Registration protects you better and avoids future disputes.

Always remember:

Register your agreement to sell, especially if you pay money or take possession.
Keep proof of payment (bank receipt, cheque, etc.).
Mention all key terms — property details, price, and time limit.
Take legal advice before signing any property paper.

📣 Final Takeaway

The Supreme Court says:
Even if your agreement to sell is unregistered, you can still show it in court to prove there was a deal —
but it won’t prove you already own the property.

🧾 Case Summary:

Case Name:Muruganandam vs Muniyandi (Died) through LRs
Citation: 2025 INSC 652
Court: Supreme Court of India
Date of Judgment: 8 May 2025
Bench: Justice P.S. Narasimha & Justice Joymalya Bagchi
Key Point: Unregistered agreement admissible as evidence to prove existence of contract in a specific performance suit.

Supreme Court Ruling in Tirth Agro Technology Pvt. Ltd. (July 2025) Big Relief for Businesses Struggling with GST Refunds

Sat, 04 Oct 2025 03:48:56 +0000

🏭 What is the Problem of “Inverted Duty Structure”?

Normally in GST, the tax you pay on raw materials (inputs) can be adjusted against the tax you collect on sales (output).

👉 Example:

You buy cloth at 18% GST.
You sell stitched shirts at 5% GST.

This creates a mismatch:

You paid more GST on purchases.
You collected less GST on sales.

Result: You are left with extra tax credit (called Input Tax Credit or ITC) in your GST account.

This situation is called Inverted Duty Structure (IDS).

💰 Why Refund Matters

That extra ITC is basically your money stuck with the government.

If no refund is given, your working capital suffers.
For small businesses and manufacturers, this can be a big cash flow problem.
That’s why the GST law allows you to claim refund of unused ITC if the inverted duty structure applies

📜 What Does the GST Law Say?

Section 54(3) of CGST Act – allows refund of unutilized ITC in case of inverted duty.
Rule 89(5) of CGST Rules – explains the formula to calculate refund.

But there was a big confusion 👇

Earlier rules said only ITC on input goods (raw materials) can be refunded.
Refund of input services (like rent, security, transport, job work charges) was not allowed.

⚖️ The Confusion

In July 2022, the government issued Notification No. 14/2022.
It changed the formula for refund and gave clarity.
But the BIG question was –
👉 Does this change apply only from July 2022 onwards (prospective)?
👉 Or does it apply even to earlier refund claims (retrospective)?

Because of this confusion, many refund claims were denied by the GST department.

🏛️ Gujarat High Court’s Stand

In the case of Ascent Meditech Ltd., the Gujarat High Court ruled:

✔️ The amendment is clarificatory, not a new law.
✔️ That means it applies retrospectively.
✔️ Even refund claims relating to earlier periods (before July 2022) should benefit from this.

This was a huge win for taxpayers. But the government appealed in the Supreme Court.

⚖️ Supreme Court’s Decision – Tirth Agro Technology Pvt. Ltd. (July 2025)

The Supreme Court dismissed the government’s appeal.

👉 In simple words:

The Gujarat High Court ruling stands valid.
The amended refund formula applies to old as well as new claims.
Refund cannot be denied just because the application was filed after July 2022.

📌 What Does This Mean for Businesses?

This judgment gives massive relief to taxpayers:

✅ Old claims are valid – If your supplies were before July 2022, you can still claim refund even if you filed later.
✅ Rejected claims can be revived – If your refund was denied earlier because of “wrong formula” or “filed late”, you may appeal or reapply.
✅ Fairness ensured – You won’t lose money because of a technicality.
✅ Cash flow boost – Especially helpful for MSMEs and exporters who deal with thin margins.

📊 Example to Understand Better

Let’s take an example:

You manufacture solar panels.
Inputs (like parts, chemicals) taxed at 18% GST.
Finished product taxed at 5% GST.

Situation in 2021

You keep accumulating extra ITC because inputs are costlier in tax.
You apply for refund in 2023 (within 2 years, so valid).

What happened earlier:

Department rejected your claim saying – “New formula applies only after July 2022.”

Now, after SC ruling:

You are eligible for refund even though supplies were before July 2022.

📝 FAQs for Layman

Q1. Can I claim refund for old periods before July 2022?
👉 Yes, if your supplies were made earlier but you filed within 2 years, you can claim refund.

Q2. What if my refund was already rejected?
👉 You may file an appeal citing the Supreme Court ruling in Tirth Agro Technology Pvt. Ltd.

Q3. Do input services also qualify for refund now?
👉 The law is still tricky here – most refunds are for input goods only. But depending on your case, you may be able to include services if supported by ruling.

Q4. Is this only for Gujarat?
👉 No. The Supreme Court ruling makes it binding across India.

🔑 Final Takeaway

The Supreme Court in Tirth Agro Technology Pvt. Ltd. has given a historic relief.
It ensures that taxpayers get refunds they deserve and are not penalized by confusing rules.

👉 If you are a manufacturer, exporter, or MSME stuck with accumulated ITC, this judgment could put money back into your business.

Get Started Now

GST Case: Wrong GST Number on Invoice – Can You Still Claim ITC?

Fri, 03 Oct 2025 17:57:26 +0000

Businesses often face small mistakes in GST invoices – a wrong GSTIN, spelling errors, or address mismatches. But can such technical errors lead to denial of Input Tax Credit (ITC)?

The Delhi High Court recently answered this in the case of B Braun Medical India Pvt. Ltd. vs Union of India. The ruling comes as a relief for taxpayers, as it shows that substance is more important than form when it comes to ITC.

Facts of the Case

B Braun Medical India purchased goods from its supplier.
The supplier mistakenly mentioned the GSTIN of the company’s Bombay branch instead of its Delhi unit.
However, the goods were delivered to Delhi, and the company actually used them there.
The Tax Department argued that since the GSTIN did not match the place of supply, ITC should be denied.
The company approached the High Court.

Issue Before the Court

Can ITC be denied just because the GSTIN mentioned on the invoice was of a different branch even though the goods were genuinely received and used by the company?

High Court’s Decision

The Delhi High Court ruled in favour of B Braun Medical India.

The Court said:

Substance over technicality – If the transaction is genuine, goods were received, and tax was paid to the government, ITC cannot be denied merely for a clerical error in GSTIN.
Purpose of GST – The goal of GST is to avoid tax cascading and allow credit for genuine business transactions. Denying ITC for minor mistakes goes against the spirit of GST law.
Genuine Transaction – The department did not dispute that goods were received in Delhi and tax was duly paid. Hence, denying credit only on technical grounds was unfair.

Result: The company was allowed to claim ITC.

Why This Case Is Important

This case highlights that:

Small errors in invoices should not cost you your ITC if the transaction is genuine.
Goods received + tax paid are the two most important conditions for ITC eligibility.
Tax officers cannot deny ITC for clerical mistakes if the substance of the transaction is correct.

Practical Lessons for Businesses

✅ Always verify GSTINs while issuing/receiving invoices.
✅ If errors occur, keep proof that the goods/services were actually received (delivery challans, e-way bills, GRNs, stock registers).
✅ Maintain proper documentation to show tax has been paid by supplier.
✅ If ITC is denied for minor clerical mistakes, you can challenge it citing this judgment.

Key Takeaway

The Delhi High Court’s ruling in B Braun Medical India vs Union of India is a reminder that GST law is not meant to punish businesses for minor technical errors. What really matters is whether the transaction is genuine and tax has reached the government’s pocket.

👉 So, if you face ITC issues due to invoice mismatches, don’t panic. With proper evidence, you can defend your claim successfully.

Delhi High Court: GST Rate Cuts Must Mean Lower Prices — Not Just More Quantity for the Same Price

Tue, 30 Sep 2025 17:59:07 +0000

🗞️ What Happened?

The Delhi High Court recently gave a very important judgment about GST rate cuts — the kind the government announces to make products cheaper for consumers.

But here’s the twist: some companies were not reducing prices when GST was lowered. Instead, they were giving a little more product (like 100g extra) and keeping the price the same.

The Court said: That’s not allowed. If GST rates are cut, prices must go down. Just giving more product for the same price doesn’t count.

🔍 What Was the Case About?

A company called Sharma Trading Company, which distributes Vaseline and other products, was accused of not passing on the benefit of a GST cut.

Instead of reducing the price, they increased the quantity of Vaseline in the same pack and kept the MRP (Maximum Retail Price) unchanged.

The government authorities said: this violates GST rules, which say businesses must pass on tax benefits to consumers in the form of lower prices.

Sharma Trading challenged this in the Delhi High Court.

⚖️ What Did the Court Say? What Did the Court Say? What Did the Court Say? What Did the Court Say? What Did the Court Say?

The Delhi High Court made it clear:

You can’t just give more quantity and say you’ve passed on the tax benefit.
The price must come down. That’s what the law demands.

In simple terms:

If the government reduces GST from, say, 18% to 12%, that’s meant to make your product cheaper.

The benefit of that tax cut should be seen in your bill, not hidden in more product or freebies.

The Court also said:

This is about protecting the consumer.

If companies are allowed to keep prices the same and just change the pack size, then people don’t really feel the benefit of tax cuts.

🛒 Why Does This Matter to You (as a consumer)? Why Does This Matter to You (as a consumer)? Why Does This Matter to You (as a consumer)? Why Does This Matter to You (as a consumer)? Why Does This Matter to You (as a consumer)?

This judgment is great news for all of us because:

✅ It protects our right to get lower prices when taxes are reduced.
✅ It stops companies from using clever tricks (like giving more product but keeping prices the same).
✅ It helps make sure tax savings reach your pocket , not just boost company profits. It helps make sure tax savings reach your pocket, not just boost company profits., not just boost company profits., not just boost company profits., not just boost company profits.

So next time the government announces a GST cut, you should see it in the form of a lower price tag, not just an extra spoonful of product!

🧠 Simple Takeaway Simple Takeaway Simple Takeaway Simple Takeaway Simple Takeaway

If GST goes down, your price should go down — not just the company adding more to the pack and charging you the same.

As the Delhi High Court said:

“More quantity at same price ≠ lower price.”

Taxation of Virtual Digital Assets (VDAs) in India – A Simple Guide for Everyone

Tue, 23 Sep 2025 14:40:12 +0000

Over the last few years, we’ve all heard terms like Bitcoin, Ethereum, NFTs, and crypto coins. These are all forms of Virtual Digital Assets (VDAs). While many people trade in them or even gift them, one big question arises: How does tax work on these assets in India?

Don’t worry – here’s a simple explanation.

✅ What Are Virtual Digital Assets (VDAs)?

VDAs include:

Cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin, Ethereum, Dogecoin.

NFTs (Non-Fungible Tokens) – unique digital collectibles, art, music tokens.

Any other digital asset notified by the government.

So, if you are buying, selling, or transferring these, you’re dealing in VDAs.

🧾 How Are VDAs Taxed in India?

From 1st April 2022, the government introduced a clear taxation framework:
Flat 30% Tax on any profit from VDAs.
Example: If you buy Bitcoin for ₹1,00,000 and sell it for ₹1,50,000, your profit is ₹50,000.
You must pay ₹15,000 as tax (30%).
No Deductions Allowed
You cannot claim expenses like internet charges, electricity bills, or transaction fees.
The only deduction allowed is the cost of purchase.
No Set-off of Losses
If you lose money in crypto, you cannot adjust it against other income like salary, rent, or even gains from shares.
Loss in one VDA cannot be set-off against profit in another VDA.
1% TDS (Tax Deducted at Source)
When you sell a VDA, 1% TDS is deducted on the transaction value if it crosses certain limits.
This applies whether you sell on an exchange or directly.
Example: If you sell crypto worth ₹1,00,000, then ₹1,000 (1%) will be deducted as TDS and reported to the government.

🎁 What if You Receive VDAs as a Gift?

If you receive crypto/NFTs as a gift, they are taxable as “Income from Other Sources” if the total value of gifts exceeds ₹50,000 in a year.

Later, if you sell the gifted VDA, you will again pay 30% tax on profits

📌 Why Did the Government Do This?

The government wants:

To regulate crypto transactions.
To prevent tax evasion.
To ensure transparency in this new digital economy.

🧑‍💼 What Should You Do as an Investor?

Keep Records – note down every buy/sell price and date.
Report in ITR – declare income from VDAs separately in your Income Tax Return.
Plan Taxes – don’t assume crypto is tax-free; factor 30% tax before investing.

⚖️ Key Takeaway

Profits from crypto, NFTs, and other VDAs are taxed at 30% flat.
1% TDS is deducted on sales.
No loss adjustment or expense deduction is allowed.

So, while crypto may feel like the “currency of the future,” the tax rules are already here – and very strict!

Gst Rate cuts 2025: What Gets Cheaper, What gets Costlier

Sun, 17 Aug 2025 07:48:10 +0000

The Goods and Services Tax (GST) has changed the way we pay taxes, but as rates undergo another round of rationalization in 2025, taxpayers wonder: What’s going to get cheaper, and what won’t?

This year’s expected changes show a clear trend — essentials and growth sectors are set to get relief, while harmful or luxury categories may face higher taxes.

1. Insurance at 5% – A Big Win for Families

Insurance is no longer a luxury — it’s a necessity. But high GST has kept many away.

Then: Around 18% GST made health & life insurance premiums feel expensive.

Now (Expected): Just 5% GST on premiums.

Impact in Simple Terms: A ₹10,000 policy will now cost you ₹10,500 instead of nearly ₹11,800 — saving your family ₹1,300 instantly.

Bigger Picture: More people will be insured, reducing crisis-time money problems and improving financial stability.

✅ Insurance becomes affordable, and financial security grows.

2. Cement at 18% – Affordable Homes & Stronger Infrastructure

Cement is the foundation of housing, roads, bridges, and India’s growth. But it has long carried 28% GST, which made construction expensive.

Then: 28% GST made homes and infrastructure costly.

Now (Expected): 18% GST.

Impact in Simple Terms: Building a ₹10 lakh house could see savings of ₹40,000–₹50,000.

Bigger Picture: Cheaper homes, boost to affordable housing projects, and a surge in construction jobs.

✅ Homes cheaper, jobs rise, infrastructure quicker.

3. Heavier Taxes on Harmful Products

Not everything should be cheaper. Harmful items are expected to see steep GST increases, even up to 500% more.

Gutkha & Tobacco: Higher prices will discourage use, reduce health problems, and save families from huge medical bills.

Online Betting & Gambling: Addictive apps and websites may get heavily taxed, limiting their lure for youngsters.

Impact in Simple Terms: Bad habits costlier, good habits rewarded.

Bigger Picture: Higher government revenue, healthier population.

4. Snapshot: Other Key Product Categories

Here’s where other goods & services may stand after GST changes:

Category	Current GST	Expected After Cut/Change	Effect on You
Food essentials (grains, veg, milk)	0% – 5%	No major change	No extra burden
Packaged food & snacks	12%	Likely 5–12%	Everyday items a bit cheaper
Household items (paint, tiles, steel)	18–28%	May reduce to 18%	Construction & renovation cheaper
Two-wheelers & small cars	28% + cess	May see small cut	Budget vehicles slightly cheaper
Luxury cars, hotels, alcohol	28%+	Likely unchanged or higher	Remains expensive
Banking services (loans, fees)	18%	May reduce to 12%	Reduced bank charges possible

5. What It Means for You in Plain Words

Middle Class Families → Insurance will cost less, and building or buying a house will be easier.

Homebuyers & Real Estate Sector → Cement tax cut means a huge relief in construction costs and property prices.

Youth → While essentials get cheaper, addictive activities like betting and tobacco will pinch the pocket.

Government → May earn less from tax cuts on essentials but will balance it by taxing harmful items more

Final Thoughts: Balanced Relief with Responsibility

This mix of GST cuts and hikes shows a smart policy approach:

Essentials like insurance and housing inputs get cheaper → helping families and growth.

Harmful habits like gutkha and online betting get taxed harder → protecting health and society.

Everyday items get mild relief → keeping inflation in check.

👉 In simple terms:Good things will cost less. Bad habits will cost more. And India will move toward a fairer tax system.

How One Word Saved a Taxpayer from Paying Over Rs. 1 Crore in Capital Gains Tax

Mon, 11 Aug 2025 03:57:21 +0000

The Story in Simple Words

Back in 1993, a young man named Krishnagopal B. Nangpal inherited a flat in Mumbai from his late mother. The flat was sold for ₹1.45 crore.

Under the Income-tax law, when you sell a property, you may have to pay Capital Gains Tax on the profit. However, Section 54 says that if you use that profit to buy another residential property, you can avoid paying the tax.

Mr. Nangpal’s guardian did exactly that — but went one step further. Instead of buying just one home, he bought seven row houses in Pune between 1993 and 1995, investing all the capital gains of around ₹1.08 crore.

That’s when the trouble started.

The Tax Departments View

Justice Sandeep

The Assessing Officer and later the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) said:
"Section 54 allows exemption only for One residential property not seven"
So they granted tax exemption for just one of the houses and taxed the rest of the gain.

The Twist- A Tiny Language Loophole

Here's where the brilliance of the case lies.

At that time, before 2014, Section 54 used the words:

"......the assessee has purchased within a pe1riod of one year before or two year after the date on which the transfer took place. a residential house....

The law did not say "one residential house" or single residential house".

The taxpayer's legal team argued:

* " A residential house" descriptive not a strict number.

* The law didn't put a cap on how many houses could be purchased.

* As long as all the Capital Gains were invested in residential properties within the allowed time, the exemption should apply.

The Bombay High Court's Ruling (22 July 2025)

Justice Sandeep V. Marne of the Bombay High Court ruled in favor of Mr. Nangpal:

1. Wording Matters: At the time of the Transaction (1993-95), the phrase was "a residential house," not "one residential house."

2. Beneficial interpretation: Section 54 is a beneficial provision, meant to give relief to taxpayers- So in case of doubt, the law should be interpreted liberally in their favor.

3. Multiple homes allowed: Since there was no explicit restriction then, the purchased of multiple houses still qualified for full exemption.

4. Result: Entire capital gains exempt- No Income Tax Payable on the Rs. 1.08 Crore gain.

Case Reference:
Krishnagopal B. Nangpal Vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (Bombay HC, Judgment dated 22 July 2025)

Section 54 — Then vs. Now

Aspect	Old Law (Pre-2014)	Current Law (AY 2025-26)
Wording	“a residential house” (descriptive)	“one residential house in India” (restrictive)
Number of properties	Multiple allowed (as per court interpretation)	Only one property eligible for exemption
Location restriction	Could be anywhere in India (foreign properties not covered)	Must be in India
Investment limit	No upper monetary limit	Max. investment eligible = ₹10 crore (introduced in Budget 2023)
Special concession	—	For AY 2020-21 onwards: Once in a lifetime, 2 houses allowed if gain ≤ ₹2 crore

Key Learnings for Taxpayers

1. Small words make big differences - "a" vs "one" changed the outcome completely.

2. Know the year's rules- Exemption depend on the law in force when you sold the properly.

3. Court Interpretations matter - Older transaction may benefit from more liberal readings.

4. Don't assume- always get a professional to check how the law applies to your case.

This Case is Unique

1. Its not about finding loophole- Its about correctly reading the law as it was

2. The Taxpayer acted in good faith, reinvesting all gains in housing.

3. The "Minor language error" wasn't a tick - It was gap that the legislature later closed in 2014.

In a Nutshell

In 1993, the law said “a residential house”.
In 2025, the Bombay High Court said — that means multiple houses are okay.
If you did the same thing today? You’d be taxed — unless it’s just one property, and even then, up to ₹10 crore investment limit.

Get Started Now

GST Registration Cancelled: Supplier was Fake, Says Bombay High Court.

Sun, 13 Jul 2025 09:37:18 +0000

The Bombay High Court recently made an important decision: it said that the GST registration of a business can be cancelled if the suppliers it deals with are not real or do not exist.

⏳ Final Call: File Your Pending GST Returns Before the 3-Year Deadline

Mon, 23 Jun 2025 12:45:16 +0000

The Goods and Services Tax Network (GSTN) has issued a crucial advisory urging taxpayers to file all pending GST returns before the expiry of a three-year window. This change, introduced via the Finance Act, 2023 and effective from October 1, 2023, will be enforced on the GST portal starting July 2025.

🚫 What’s Changing?

As per the amended provisions under Sections 37, 39, 44, and 52 of the CGST Act, taxpayers will no longer be allowed to file GST returns after three years from their respective due dates. This applies to the following forms:

GSTR-1 / IFF / 1A
GSTR-3B
GSTR-4
GSTR-5 / 5A
GSTR-6
GSTR-7
GSTR-8
GSTR-9 / 9C

📅 Effective From: July 2025 Tax Period

Starting August 1, 2025, the GST portal will restrict filing of returns whose due dates fall before July 31, 2022. Below is a quick reference table:

GST Form	Barred Period (w.e.f. August 1, 2025)
GSTR-1 / IFF	June 2022
GSTR-1Q	April–June 2022
GSTR-3B / M	June 2022
GSTR-3BQ	April–June 2022
GSTR-4	FY 2021–22
GSTR-5	June 2022
GSTR-6	June 2022
GSTR-7	June 2022
GSTR-8	June 2022
GSTR-9 / 9C	FY 2020–21

📝 What You Should Do Now

Review your filing history across all GSTINs.
Identify any returns due before July 2022 that remain unfiled.
File them immediately—before the system locks you out.
Reconcile your books to avoid discrepancies and penalties.

⚠️ Why It Matters

Once the three-year window closes, you will permanently lose the ability to file those returns, even if you're willing to pay interest or penalties. This could lead to:

Loss of Input Tax Credit (ITC)
Notices from tax authorities
Legal and financial consequences

Don’t wait until it’s too late. Take action now and ensure your compliance is up to date.