The High Court held that a review cannot be entertained without a clear error or new evidence. Re-arguing the case on merits was found impermissible.
The Court ruled that “sufficient cause” must explain the entire limitation period, not just post-expiry delay. Negligence or inaction, including by government bodies, cannot justify condonation.
The Supreme Court ruled that duty-free imports under export incentive licences cannot be denied without evidence of fraud. Valid licences and verified exports were held sufficient to retain benefits.
The Court held that a buyer cannot be saddled with purchase tax merely because the seller failed to remit tax when the transaction was otherwise taxable at the seller’s end.
The Court held that alleged overlap between State and Central GST proceedings involves factual scrutiny, not a pure legal issue. Taxpayers must pursue statutory appeals instead of writ remedies.
The Karnataka High Court held that blocking electronic credit ledger under Rule 86A without a prior hearing and independent reasons violates natural justice and is unsustainable in law.
The court ruled that genuine purchasers cannot lose ITC because a supplier failed to deposit GST. Section 16(2)(c) must be applied only to fraudulent or collusive cases.
The Court ruled that issuing deficiency memos beyond 15 days is contrary to GST law. Tax authorities must adhere strictly to timelines and compensate taxpayers with statutory interest for delays.
The Supreme Court affirmed that a single SCN covering several years is valid where fraudulent ITC patterns span periods, enabling holistic investigation under the CGST Act.
The Court ruled that issuing an SCN before the pre-SCN reply period expires violates natural justice. The key takeaway is that authorities must allow the full reply window before initiating adjudication.
