The court ruled that invoking an inapplicable statutory provision vitiates revision. Proper identification of the governing section is mandatory before exercising revisional powers.
The High Court upheld the Tribunal’s decision restricting disallowance on alleged bogus purchases to 6 percent. It held that the issue was already settled in the assessee’s own earlier year and raised no substantial question of law.
The issue was whether religious objects alone could defeat an 80G claim. The Tribunal ruled that compliance with the 5% expenditure limit requires fresh examination.
The Court dealt with an ex parte GST order passed without a reply to the show cause notice. Holding that natural justice was violated, it remanded the matter for fresh adjudication with hearing.
The court set aside a GST demand raised after issuing a show cause notice to a dead proprietor. It held that tax determination cannot be made against a deceased person without first issuing notice to legal representatives.
The High Court held that an appellate authority should not decide an appeal on merits when the appellant is absent. The appeal was restored to ensure a fair opportunity of hearing.
The Court ruled that a wrong PIN code in the e-way bill, when the address is correct and documents are valid, cannot justify seizure. The key takeaway is that minor clerical errors do not trigger Section 129 proceedings.
The High Court held that jewellery seized during a search cannot be retained once tax liability is fully settled under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme. Continued detention after issuance of Form-5 was declared illegal.
The High Court ruled that authorities cannot block an electronic credit ledger beyond the ITC actually available. Negative balances created under Rule 86A were held to be without jurisdiction.
The Court noted that no show cause notice had been issued and the tax demand was not finally quantified. It allowed limited operation of the bank account to ensure business continuity.
