The Court ruled that although the Joint Commissioner is the competent authority to levy penalty, initiation of proceedings still requires satisfaction recorded during assessment proceedings. Absence of such satisfaction rendered the penalty invalid.
The Calcutta High Court held that filing an audit report in Form 10BB instead of Form 10B was a procedural lapse that could not defeat substantive exemption rights under Section 12A. The Court directed the authority to decide the condonation application within a specified timeline.
The Calcutta High Court held that a rectification order under Section 154 passed after the statutory limitation period was without jurisdiction. The Court consequently quashed the order and related recovery proceedings.
Reimbursement of interim payments from insured banks in priority to other liabilities was a valid exercise of legislative competence. The argument that the DICGC, being an insurer, was limited to the rights of subrogation and could not rank higher than the insured depositors was rejected.
The Karnataka High Court held that TCS liability under Section 52 arises only when an e-commerce operator collects payment for supplies made through its platform. Since the operator merely facilitated transactions without collecting consideration, GST proceedings under Section 74 were quashed.
The Calcutta High Court refused to entertain the writ petition after noting that the GST Appellate Tribunal under Section 112 had been constituted. The petitioner was granted liberty to file an appeal before the Tribunal.
Telangana High Court permitted the taxpayer to withdraw the writ petition and pursue statutory appeal under Section 107 of the CGST Act. The Court directed the appellate authority to consider the delay sympathetically because the taxpayer had earlier approached the High Court.
Telangana High Court permitted the taxpayer to withdraw the writ petition and pursue statutory appeal under Section 107 of the CGST Act. The Court directed the appellate authority to consider the delay sympathetically since the taxpayer had approached the High Court earlier.
High Court held that taxpayers should not be denied an opportunity to seek revocation of cancelled GST registration merely because the online portal does not permit filing after limitation expiry.
Telangana High Court permitted the taxpayer to withdraw the writ petition and pursue statutory appeal under Section 107 of the CGST Act. The Court directed the appellate authority to consider the delay sympathetically because the taxpayer had been pursuing remedy before the High Court.
