🚫 𝗗𝗲𝗹𝗵𝗶 𝗛𝗖 𝗤𝘂𝗮𝘀𝗵𝗲𝘀 𝗧𝗮𝘅 𝗗𝗲𝗺𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗼𝗻 𝗘𝗺𝗽𝗹𝗼𝘆𝗲𝗲 𝗦𝗲𝗰𝗼𝗻𝗱𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁 – 𝗡𝗼 𝗜𝗚𝗦𝗧 𝗟𝗶𝗮𝗯𝗶𝗹𝗶𝘁𝘆 𝗼𝗻 '𝗡𝗶𝗹' 𝗩𝗮𝗹𝘂𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻! 🚫 In 𝘔𝘦𝘵𝘢𝘭 𝘖𝘯𝘦 𝘊𝘰𝘳𝘱𝘰𝘳𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘐𝘯𝘥𝘪𝘢 (𝘗) 𝘓𝘵𝘥. 𝘷𝘴. 𝘜𝘯𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘰𝘧 𝘐𝘯𝘥𝘪𝘢 the Delhi High Court q͟u͟a͟s͟h͟e͟d͟ ͟s͟h͟o͟w͟ ͟c͟a͟u͟s͟e͟ ͟n͟o͟t͟i͟c͟e͟s͟ ͟issued under Section 73 of the CGST Act d͟e͟m͟a͟n͟d͟i͟n͟g͟ ͟I͟G͟S͟T͟ ͟o͟n͟ ͟t͟h͟e͟ ͟s͟e͟c͟o͟n͟d͟m͟e͟n͟t͟ ͟o͟f͟ ͟e͟m͟p͟l͟o͟y͟e͟e͟s͟ ͟b͟y͟ ͟o͟v͟e͟r͟s͟e͟a͟s͟ ͟p͟a͟r͟e͟n͟t͟ ͟c͟o͟m͟p͟a͟n͟i͟e͟s͟.͟ ͟📜🚫 ➡️ The Revenue alleged that secondment agreements constituted import of services, triggering IGST under the Reverse Charge Mechanism (RCM), along with interest and penalties. However, 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗖𝗼𝘂𝗿𝘁 𝗿𝗲𝗳𝗲𝗿𝗿𝗲𝗱 𝘁𝗼 𝗖𝗕𝗜𝗖 𝗖𝗶𝗿𝗰𝘂𝗹𝗮𝗿 𝗡𝗼. 𝟮𝟭𝟬/𝟰/𝟮𝟬𝟮𝟰 𝘄𝗵𝗶𝗰𝗵 𝘀𝗽𝗲𝗰𝗶𝗳𝗶𝗲𝘀 𝘁𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝗶𝗳 𝗻𝗼 𝗶𝗻𝘃𝗼𝗶𝗰𝗲𝘀 𝗮𝗿𝗲 𝗿𝗮𝗶𝘀𝗲𝗱, 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝘀𝗲𝗿𝘃𝗶𝗰𝗲 𝘃𝗮𝗹𝘂𝗲 𝗶𝘀 𝗱𝗲𝗲𝗺𝗲𝗱 '𝗡𝗶𝗹' 𝘂𝗻𝗱𝗲𝗿 𝗖𝗚𝗦𝗧 𝗿𝘂𝗹𝗲𝘀. 💡 𝗢𝘂𝘁𝗰𝗼𝗺𝗲: The Court held that, due to the absence of invoicing, no tax liability arises, and thus, quashed the impugned notices. ⚖️✅ #DelhiHighCourt #GST #IGST