The appellate tribunal upheld joint liability where accepted bills remained unpaid and the appellants failed to rebut the bank’s evidence. The ruling confirms that unchallenged documentary claims can sustain recovery orders.
High Court held that goods and conveyance detained under GST must be released once penalty is paid, where authorities failed to initiate confiscation after statutory period. Mere delay in payment did not justify continued detention.
The Court admitted the writ challenging GST orders where proceedings were initiated beyond the prescribed period. Recovery was stayed subject to a 10% deposit, highlighting limits on delayed adjudication.
The Tribunal held that DEPB income forms part of operating export income and cannot be excluded from turnover merely on a different view. Revision under section 263 was found unjustified where the original assessment involved due application of mind.
The court found that a penalty amounting to nearly 90% of the vehicle’s insured value was excessive. It ruled that only the minimum penalty under the excise rules was justified.
The Tribunal upheld reclassification and duty recovery but ruled that section 111(o) applies only where exemption conditions are breached. Mere ineligibility to exemption due to wrong classification cannot justify confiscation or penalty.
The High Court quashed a penalty show cause notice issued under Section 122, holding that jurisdiction cannot be assumed merely on the basis of a general notification. Fresh proceedings were permitted in accordance with law.
The High Court held that refunds cannot be adjusted against a demand already stayed by the Assessing Officer. It directed refund of amounts adjusted despite the assessee being treated as not in default.
The court examined allegations that an order under Section 74 was passed without supplying seized documents or digital material. The matter was adjourned for the State to clarify whether such copies could be provided.
The issue was whether further GST recovery could be initiated after interest had already been paid. The High Court granted interim protection, restraining recovery on finding a prima facie case based on prior payment.
