The Kerala High Court set aside a Single Judge’s decision after finding that earlier Division Bench directions to decide the writ petition on merits were not followed. The case involving attachment of a DRAT pre-deposit was remanded again for fresh consideration with liberty for all parties to raise their contentions.
The Delhi High Court held that the Tribunal erred in directing the grant of registration under Sections 12AB and 80G without examining the genuineness of the trust’s activities. The Court set aside the order and remanded the matter to the Commissioner for proper inquiry.
The Madras High Court observed that officers should explore other methods under Section 169, such as RPAD, when taxpayers do not respond to portal notices. The impugned order was set aside and the matter remanded.
The Allahabad High Court observed that requiring taxpayers to obtain temporary IDs from the same officer who passed the order may create delays and scope for malpractice. The Court suggested exploring auto-generation of IDs to ensure easier access to GST appeals.
The Delhi High Court held that continuing a lookout circular after the conclusion of tax proceedings and in the absence of any outstanding demand violated fundamental rights. The Court ruled that administrative delay in gathering foreign information cannot justify indefinite travel restrictions.
The Gauhati High Court held that a summary issued in Form GST DRC-01 cannot substitute the statutory requirement of a proper Show Cause Notice under Section 73. Proceedings initiated without such notice were held invalid.
The High Court set aside a GST demand after finding that the show cause notice and tax determination were issued in the name of a deceased proprietor without notifying the legal representative.
The court held that passing an ex parte GST assessment without providing a personal hearing violated procedural fairness. The case was remanded for fresh consideration with a mandatory personal hearing.
The Madras High Court set aside GST assessment orders after finding that the taxpayer was not given an opportunity of personal hearing. The case was remanded for fresh adjudication subject to payment of 25% of the disputed tax.
The High Court quashed the GST registration cancellation order but directed restoration only after the taxpayer clears pending tax liabilities. The ruling emphasizes conditional relief despite procedural violations.
