Rajasthan High Court in case of M/s B.C. Power Controls Ltd. v. Union of India held that refund application for IGST cannot be indefinitely delayed based on pendency of proceedings. Get full details and analysis here.
CESTAT set aside the order demanding excise duty and held that the buyer who has paid a valuable consideration could not be proceeded upon by taking the aid of a larger period of limitation as per Section 11A(1) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 unless it is proved that the buyer was also involved in fraud.
HC held that in case where assessee has disputes all the facts and allegation stated in the show cause notice the requirement of issuance of DRC-01A would be mere formality however, if issuance of DRC-01A would have serviced any benefit to the assessee, it would have been imperative for the court to enforce such notice on the Revenue Authorities.
Madras High Court rules on Seoyon E-Hwa Summit Automotive India’s case, justifying rejection of rectification application under CGST Act due to assessee’s lack of cooperation during assessment process.
Allahabad High Court in Mohini Traders v. State of U.P., held that assessing authority must provide an opportunity for a personal hearing before passing an adverse order, regardless of whether assessee explicitly requested it
Judgment by Bombay High Court in C.P. Rabindranath Menon v. Deputy Commissioner of State Tax, which allows unregistered persons to claim GST refunds for the period before issuance of a refund policy.
HC set aside the assessment order and held a proper opportunity must be given to the Assessee whenever a Show cause notice or an assessment order is issued and further commented that it is very difficult to file a reply to the Show Cause Notice within 12 hours.
HC directed Revenue Authority to release goods on conditions that assessee deposits a certain amount of penalty towards tax in lieu of confiscation of conveyance and furnish bank guarantee in lieu of confiscation of goods.
CESTAT, remanded order passed by Adjudicating Authority and held that denial of cross-examination of witnesses is violative of principles of natural justice.
HC ordered the Revenue department to release assessee’s refund claim with interest. The court held that Revenue cannot withhold refund solely because it plans to appeal to GST tribunal, especially when tribunal is not yet constituted.
