- Home
- News
- Articles+
- Aerospace
- AI
- Agriculture
- Alternate Dispute Resolution
- Arbitration & Mediation
- Banking and Finance
- Bankruptcy
- Book Review
- Bribery & Corruption
- Commercial Litigation
- Competition Law
- Conference Reports
- Consumer Products
- Contract
- Corporate Governance
- Corporate Law
- Covid-19
- Cryptocurrency
- Cybersecurity
- Data Protection
- Defence
- Digital Economy
- E-commerce
- Employment Law
- Energy and Natural Resources
- Entertainment and Sports Law
- Environmental Law
- ESG
- FDI
- Food and Beverage
- Gaming
- Health Care
- IBC Diaries
- In Focus
- Inclusion & Diversity
- Insurance Law
- Intellectual Property
- International Law
- IP & Tech Era
- Know the Law
- Labour Laws
- Law & Policy and Regulation
- Litigation
- Litigation Funding
- Manufacturing
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- NFTs
- Privacy
- Private Equity
- Project Finance
- Real Estate
- Risk and Compliance
- Student Corner
- Take On Board
- Tax
- Technology Media and Telecom
- Tributes
- Viewpoint
- Zoom In
- Law Firms
- In-House
- Rankings
- E-Magazine
- Legal Era TV
- Events
- News
- Articles
- Aerospace
- AI
- Agriculture
- Alternate Dispute Resolution
- Arbitration & Mediation
- Banking and Finance
- Bankruptcy
- Book Review
- Bribery & Corruption
- Commercial Litigation
- Competition Law
- Conference Reports
- Consumer Products
- Contract
- Corporate Governance
- Corporate Law
- Covid-19
- Cryptocurrency
- Cybersecurity
- Data Protection
- Defence
- Digital Economy
- E-commerce
- Employment Law
- Energy and Natural Resources
- Entertainment and Sports Law
- Environmental Law
- ESG
- FDI
- Food and Beverage
- Gaming
- Health Care
- IBC Diaries
- In Focus
- Inclusion & Diversity
- Insurance Law
- Intellectual Property
- International Law
- IP & Tech Era
- Know the Law
- Labour Laws
- Law & Policy and Regulation
- Litigation
- Litigation Funding
- Manufacturing
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- NFTs
- Privacy
- Private Equity
- Project Finance
- Real Estate
- Risk and Compliance
- Student Corner
- Take On Board
- Tax
- Technology Media and Telecom
- Tributes
- Viewpoint
- Zoom In
- Law Firms
- In-House
- Rankings
- E-Magazine
- Legal Era TV
- Events
Punjab & Haryana High Court Notice To Central Government Over CGST Rules’ Amnesty Scheme

Punjab & Haryana High Court Notice To Central Government Over CGST Rules’ Amnesty Scheme
It will have significant implications for taxpayers, as the measures were taken to reduce litigation
The High Court of Punjab and Haryana has issued notice of motion to the Government of India in a writ petition by Mitsuba India Private Limited challenging the power of Rule 164 of the Central Goods and Services Tax (CGST) Rules, 2017.
The rule prescribes conditions for opting for the Amnesty Scheme under the CGST Act.
The assessee stated that Rule 164 was ultra vires Section 128A. It posed restrictions not contemplated in the Section. The rule was arbitrary and discriminated against persons who had paid tax through Income Tax Returns (ITRs). However, it forced them to pay the tax again to avail the scheme’s benefits.
The challenge has significant implications for taxpayers, as the Amnesty Scheme was introduced to reduce litigation regarding the initial three years of the Goods and Services Tax (GST) regime.
The petitioner was represented by Lakshmikumaran and Sridharan Attorneys.
The team was led by Senior Advocate B.L. Narasimhan. He was assisted by Amrinder Singh, Shreya Khunteta and Samiksha Uniyal (Advocates).