Section 32 Arbitration Act | Termination for Non-Payment of Fees Ends Arbitrator’s Mandate; Remedy Lies in Section 14(2): Supreme Court False Allegations of Dowry and Bigamy Amount to Mental Cruelty: Madras High Court Upholds Divorce Plaintiff Must Prove Her Own Title Before Seeking Demolition Of Defendant’s Pre-existing House: Andhra Pradesh High Court Mismatch Between Bullet and Recovered Gun Fatal to Prosecution: Calcutta High Court Acquits Man Convicted for Murder Where the Conduct of the Sole Eye-Witness Appears Unnatural and No Independent Witness Is Examined, Conviction Cannot Stand: Allahabad High Court Fraudulent Sale of Vehicle During Hire Purchase Renders Agreement Void: Gauhati High Court Upholds Decree for Refund of ₹4.90 Lakhs Unsigned Written Statement Can’t Silence a Defendant: Hyper-Technical Objections Must Yield to Substantive Justice: Delhi High Court Default Bail | No Accused, No Extension: Delhi High Court Rules Custody Extension Without Notice as Gross Illegality Under Article 21 Gratuity Can Be Withheld Post-Retirement for Proven Negligence Under Service Rules – Payment of Gratuity Act Does Not Override CDA Rules: Calcutta High Court Cognizance Is of the Offence, Not the Offender: Madras High Court Rejects Challenge to ED’s Supplementary Complaint in PMLA Case Acquittal in Rajasthan No Bar to Trial in Madhya Pradesh: MP High Court Rejects Double Jeopardy Plea in Antiquities Theft Case 20% Deposit Isn’t Automatic in Cheque Bounce Appeals: Right to Appeal Can’t Be Priced Out: Punjab & Haryana High Court Checks Mechanical Use of Section 148 NI Act A Child Is Not a Non-Earner: Punjab & Haryana High Court Sets New Benchmark in Compensation for Minors’ Deaths 90 Days Is Not Sacrosanct – Courts Can Permit Reply to Counter-Claim Even Beyond Prescribed Time in Interest of Justice: Punjab & Haryana High Court Magistrate Can Proceed Only for Offences Committed in India Until Sanction Is Obtained for Acts Outside India: Orissa High Court on International Financial Fraud Award Is Vitiated by Non-Consideration of Material Evidence: Orissa High Court Sets Aside Industrial Tribunal’s Wage Award in IMFA Case POCSO | Absence of Child's Name in Birth Certificate Not Fatal: Kerala High Court No One Has the Right to Impute Illicit Motives to Judges in the Name of Free Speech: Karnataka High Court Jails Man for Criminal Contempt DV Complaint Cannot Be Quashed at Threshold Under Article 227: Madras High Court Refuses to Interfere, Directs Accused to Seek Remedy Before Magistrate Recovery Wasn't From Accused's Exclusive Knowledge — Cylinder Already Marked in Site Plan Before Arrest: Allahabad High Court Acquits Man in Murder Case State Can’t Block SARFAESI Sale by Late Revenue Entries: Secured Creditor’s Charge Prevails Over Tax Dues: Punjab & Haryana High Court Slams Sub-Registrar’s Refusal Providing SIM Card Without Knowledge of Its Criminal Use Does Not Imply Criminal Conspiracy: P&H High Court Grants Bail in UAPA & Murder Case Importer Who Accepts Enhanced Valuation Cannot Later Contest Confiscation and Penalty for Undervaluation: Madras High Court Upholds Strict Liability under Customs Act "Allegations Are Not Proof: Madras High Court Refuses Divorce Without Substantiated Cruelty or Desertion" When FIR Is Filed After Consulting Political Leaders, the Possibility of Coloured Version Cannot Be Ruled Out: Kerala High Court Mere Allegations of Antecedents Without Conviction Can't Defeat Right to Anticipatory Bail: Kerala High Court Section 106 Of Evidence Act Cannot Be Invoked In Vacuum – Prosecution Must First Lay Foundational Facts: Karnataka High Court Acquits Wife And Co-Accused In Husband’s Murder Case Parity Cannot Be Claimed When Roles Are Different: Karnataka High Court Refuses Bail to Youth Accused of Brutal Killing Injured Wife Would Not Falsely Implicate Her Husband: Gauhati High Court Upholds Conviction in Domestic Stabbing Case Disputed Bids, Missing Evidence and No Prejudice: Delhi High Court Refuses to Intervene in Tender Challenge under Article 226 Setting Fire to House Where Only Minors Were Present is a Heinous Offence – No Quashing Merely Because Parties Settled: Calcutta High Court No Exclusive Possession Means Licence, Not Lease: Calcutta High Court Rules City Civil Court Has Jurisdiction to Evict Licensees Defendant's Own Family Attested the Sale Agreement – Yet She Called It Nominal: Andhra Pradesh High Court Upholds Specific Performance Renewal Not Automatic, No Evidence Of Notice Or Mutual Agreement: AP High Court Dismisses Indian Oil’s Appeal Against Eviction

Lack of Authority by Tax Research Unit: Delhi High Court Quashes Circular on GST Classification of Polypropylene Bags

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling that affects manufacturers and processors in the technical textiles industry, the Delhi High Court today struck down a controversial circular regarding the Goods and Services Tax (GST) classification of polypropylene woven and non-woven bags. The judgment, pronounced by a bench comprising Hon’ble Mr. Justice Yashwant Varma and Hon’ble Mr. Justice Dharmesh Sharma, addressed the contentious issue of whether these items should be classified under plastic goods or textiles for GST purposes.

The court observed that the circular, dated December 31, 2018, issued by the Tax Research Unit (TRU) lacked proper statutory backing. “No authority vested in the TRU to issue the clarification impugned before us,” the bench stated, highlighting a crucial aspect of judicial authority under the Central Goods & Services Tax Act, 2017.

The petition, filed by the Association of Technical Textiles Manufacturers and Processors, challenged the TRU’s circular which classified polypropylene bags under ‘plastics,’ arguing that these materials should be regarded as textiles, significantly affecting their GST rates.

The Court meticulously dissected the legal framework, noting that, “The impugned circular also fails to advert to the Notes placed in Chapter 39, and which in unambiguous terms, exclude textiles from the ambit thereof.” This observation was pivotal in the Court’s decision, emphasizing the necessity for accurate and lawful classification in the GST regime.

While the Court refrained from making a definitive statement on the classification of the materials, citing the need for comprehensive material and consideration of industry-wide ramifications, it left the issue open for competent authority. “Courts should avoid expressing an opinion on questions of classification unless they are directly raised and adequate and cogent material placed on the record,” the judgment read, underlining the court’s cautious approach in matters of significant economic impact.

The decision was met with relief by the petitioners and is expected to have substantial repercussions for the technical textiles industry. The ruling underscores the importance of statutory authority and proper procedure in the issuance of directives under the GST framework, setting a precedent for future classification disputes.

Representatives for both parties, including Mr. V. Lakshmikumaran and Mr. Kunal Kapoor for the petitioners, and a team led by Ms. Shubhra Parashar for the respondents, presented their arguments in a case that has been closely watched by industry experts and tax professionals alike.

The quashing of the circular dated December 31, 2018, marks a significant moment in the interpretation and application of GST law, particularly in the realm of manufacturing and taxation classification.

Date of Decision: 16 November 2023

ASSOCIATION OF TECHNICAL TEXTILES MANUFACTURERS AND PROCESSORS & ANR. VS UNION OF INDIA & ORS    

Latest Legal News