The High Court set aside the Tribunal’s order after finding it failed to consider binding rulings on DGFT authority and import restrictions under the FTDR Act. The matter was remanded for fresh adjudication based on established legal principles.
The Bombay High Court condoned a 338-day delay in filing Form No. 10 for income accumulation under Section 11(2), holding that genuine hardship justified relaxation of procedural deadlines.
The Court held that Rule 86A can be applied only to ITC actually available in the Electronic Credit Ledger on the date of the blocking order. The decision sets aside the blocking and directs restoration of credit recovered under the invalid order.
The Court held that Section 161 cannot be invoked to amend a show cause notice and found the rectification request to be a delaying tactic. It ruled that alleged errors must be raised in the response to the notice.
Court held that a statutory appeal cannot be denied merely because GST portal reflects ‘Nil’ disputed tax. It directed GSTN to modify system and allowed taxpayer to file a physical appeal pending correction.
Tribunal held that earlier expense disallowances were excessive and reduced them to 10% of turnover. The ruling emphasizes that lack of supporting documents justifies estimation but requires reasonable limits.
