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.
The Court held that each financial year creates a separate cause of action, making a consolidated notice legally unsustainable. It quashed the notice and allowed fresh year-wise proceedings.
The ruling found that issuing a single notice for multiple tax years violates statutory requirements. The Court quashed the notice and permitted authorities to issue separate notices for each year.
The case examined whether a modified return could be scrutinized again after assessment. The ruling clarified that once assessment is completed considering reorganisation, further scrutiny is impermissible.
The issue was rejection of an appeal filed beyond the condonable period under GST law. The Court allowed reconsideration due to a minor nine-day delay supported by valid reasons.
The Tribunal held that differential CVD cannot be demanded without evidence linking the importer to MRP alteration. Allegations based on assumptions and third-party actions were rejected.
The Tribunal held that no penalty is leviable where service tax and interest are paid before issuance of notice. Absence of fraud or suppression entitled the assessee to relief.
