ITAT Hyderabad held that reassessment proceedings were invalid because the notice under Section 148 was issued by the jurisdictional officer rather than through the mandatory faceless system. The assessment order was quashed for lack of jurisdiction.
The Madras High Court held that passing two assessment orders for the same GSTR-2A and GSTR-3B mismatch leads to duplication and double taxation. The earlier order was quashed and the later order was remanded for fresh consideration.
The High Court condoned delay in filing a GST appeal where the taxpayer believed the supplier would rectify an ITC mismatch. The appeal was restored for decision on merits.
The Karnataka High Court held that once cognizance is taken, a private complaint assumes the nature of an FIR and may be referred to by the complainant during testimony. The Court upheld the Magistrate’s decision permitting such reference.
ITAT Delhi held that reassessment proceedings are invalid when notice under Section 148 is issued in the name of a company that had already converted into an LLP. The Tribunal ruled that proceedings against a non-existent entity are void in law.
The Allahabad High Court rejected bail in a large GST fraud involving fake invoices and dummy firms used to generate fraudulent input tax credit. The Court held that economic offences causing huge loss to public funds require a stricter approach to bail.
CESTAT Hyderabad held that expenses incurred for travel and stay of foreign specialists cannot be included in the taxable value since they were not charged by the service provider as consideration.
The Allahabad High Court set aside an order rejecting a GST appeal as time-barred. It held that the appellate authority failed to properly consider the argument that Form DRC-07 was uploaded later and affected the limitation calculation.
The court held that a taxpayer should approach the GST Appellate Tribunal for interim relief when an appeal is pending. It ruled that the Tribunal has inherent power to grant interim protection against recovery proceedings.
ITAT Mumbai held that marketing and advertisement expenses incurred to promote products on an online retail platform are revenue in nature since they relate to expansion of an existing business.
