Latest news with #CentralGSTandCentralExcise
The Hindu
2 days ago
- Business
- The Hindu
‘108% rise in taxpayers in the Salem GST Commissionerate'
The Commissioner of Central GST and Central Excise, Salem, Sidlingappa Teli, has said that the number of taxpayers in the Salem Commissionerate has increased significantly from around 36,000 in July 2017 to around 75,000 in June 2025, showing a 108% rise. The GST Day was celebrated at the Salem GST office at Manalmedu on Tuesday evening in which Salem Railway Division Divisional Manager Panna Lal was the chief guest. Jaison Praveen Kumar, Joint Commissioner of CGST, welcomed the participants and delivered the welcome address. Speaking at the function, Mr. Sidlingappa said that GST has undergone several reforms during these eight years, adapting to business needs. So far, 55 GST cuncil meetings have been held and the GST law has been simplified significantly. Due to these reforms, the GST revenue of ₹22.08 lakh crore was achieved in the country during the last financial year. The Salem GST revenue realisation for the year 2024-25 was ₹4,360 crore, and up to May 2025, the Commissionerate has already achieved ₹832 crore, which is ₹114 crores (16.1%) more than the revenue collected during the same period last year. The national percentage increase in GST revenue was 9.4%, while the Salem Commissionerate's growth stood at 10%, Mr. Sidlingappa added. Stating that the Central Excise revenue from the sole unit under the Commissionerate's jurisdiction stood at ₹461 crore during 2024-25, Mr. Sidlingappa added that digital initiatives such as e-office, DIN-based communication, and e-invoicing have been effectively implemented, significantly enhancing transparency and taxpayer facilitation. The introduction of automatic return scrutiny and the phased implementation of e-invoicing for businesses exceeding specified turnover thresholds have notably improved compliance levels. A dedicated Suvidha Kendra has been established at the headquarters in Salem to facilitate GSTIN registrations through biometric authentication, ensuring faster and more secure issuance of GST registrations, the Commissioner added. Commendation certificates were awarded to meritorious officers and those who contributed to blood donation. Top taxpayers and high revenue-contributing entrepreneurs from various categories, including MSMEs, were felicitated.
Hindustan Times
23-06-2025
- Hindustan Times
SC deprecates accused reneging on voluntary offer of bail condition payout
The Supreme Court on Monday said that accused who seek bail by offering to pay huge amounts as part of bail conditions cannot renege on their offer and challenge the bail order as 'onerous' as such a practice amounts to playing 'ducks and drakes' with the court which affects sanctity of judicial process. The Supreme Court of India. (File Photo) Deciding a case from Madras high court, which had released a man who defaulted on payment of over ₹ 13 crore towards goods and services tax (GST), a bench of justices KV Viswanathan and N Kotiswar Singh, sitting during the partial court working days, deprecated the practice adopted by the accused Kundan Singh, whose lawyer had made an offer to pay ₹ 50 lakh as part of bail condition prior to release, in addition to payment of outstanding dues to the tune of over ₹ 2.7 crore. 'What is troubling us is that an attempt is being made to foreclose consideration of bail on merits by voluntarily offering deposit of amounts and thereafter reneging on it by saying that either the counsel had no authority to make such a statement or the (bail) condition is onerous,' the bench said. Setting aside the May 8 order of the high court, the order said, 'We strongly deprecate this practice. We have to be conscious of the sanctity of judicial process. We cannot allow parties to play ducks and drakes with the court. In this scenario, the only conclusion possible is that the original order of May 8 (modified on May 14) will have to be set aside and matter be remitted to the high court for consideration on merits.' By making the offer for monetary deposit, the top court noted that the high court did not consider the matter on merits when the bail was opposed by the Superintendent of Central GST and Central Excise. 'We cannot permit parties to take advantage of a device resorted to by them to secure an order of release,' the court held, but stopped short of directing the petitioner to surrender as senior advocate V Chitambaresh appearing for the accused informed the bench that he needs to look after his pregnant wife and his ailing father. Requesting the chief justice of the high court to 'expeditiously' take up the matter, the court converted the bail order to interim bail applicable till the date on which the high court takes up the matter. The order further requested the high court to expeditiously decide the bail plea uninfluenced by the observations made in the present order. Chitambaresh told the court that his client had no means to pay the amount fixed by the high court and the lawyer representing the petitioner was not authorised to make this offer before the order of the high court was passed. The bench was inclined to issue some general directions as it increasingly found such matters coming up in the top court. 'This scenario is becoming commonplace before this court. When parties move petition for anticipatory bail or regular bail, a voluntary offer is made by their counsel that they will deposit a substantial amount to show their bona fide.' Thereafter, the bench observed, 'What happens is that the high court is foreclosed from considering the merits of the matter. An order is made recording the submission of the lawyer to grant anticipatory bail or regular bail. An appeal is made thereafter claiming that the condition of bail is onerous.' The petitioner in the present case was charged for offences under the Central GST Act for supplying goods without proper invoice and vice versa. Singh was accused of evading tax to the tune of ₹ 13.7 crore. He was arrested on 27 March this year. In his petition for bail, his lawyer told the Madras high court that he was willing to deposit an amount of ₹ 2.7 crore upfront and would abide by any stringent conditions imposed by the high court. The bail conditions fixed by the high court was agreed to by the petitioner's lawyer and failure to deposit the amount of ₹ 2.7 crore along with ₹ 50 lakh as part of bail condition within 10 days of release would result in automatic dismissal of the bail plea. The court said that the top court has in its decisions consistently held thar onerous conditions of bail cannot be imposed while granting bail. At the same time, the order clarified, 'What is onerous will depend on the facts and circumstances of each case.' The present case was distinguished by the court as the condition came to be imposed on the accused or his lawyer's voluntary offer.
