The issue involved classification of an advanced brake system integrating multiple technologies. The authority ruled that it is not a part because braking can occur without it. The decision clarifies the importance of the essentiality test in classification.
Applying classification rules, the authority held that a specific heading for communication devices prevails over general classification as vehicle parts. This confirmed classification under 8517.
The issue was whether a composite assessment becomes wholly invalid. The Court held that valid and invalid portions can be separated and enforced accordingly.
The Tribunal held that a development agreement granting only a limited license for construction does not constitute transfer under section 2(47)(v). As no consideration was received, capital gains addition was deleted.
The Tribunal held that loan repayment cannot be treated as unexplained cash credit under section 68. The addition was deleted as it was based on incorrect classification of repayment as fresh loan.
The Court held that GSTIN cannot be cancelled solely based on supplier irregularities without examining the taxpayer’s transactions. The matter was remanded due to absence of independent findings.
The Tribunal held that penalty under section 271(1)(c) cannot be sustained when identical facts in earlier years led to deletion. Applying the principle of consistency, the penalty was deleted.
The Court held that input tax credit cannot be restricted to the month of invoice when business practices require later accounting. It ruled that such restriction defeats the objective of avoiding cascading taxation.
The Court held that input tax credit claimed on invoices from non-existent dealers justified penalty under VAT law. It reaffirmed that the burden of proof lies on the assessee and cannot shift to the Revenue.
The Court set aside a show cause notice that combined several financial years into one proceeding. It held that each assessment year must be treated separately under Section 73 of the CGST Act.
