The case addressed whether a second GST refund application is maintainable when a prior claim covered the same period. The Court held that no statutory bar exists under Section 54(1), and rejection on technical grounds was invalid.
The Court held that withdrawal of promised electricity duty exemption after investment violates promissory estoppel. Key takeaway: State cannot defeat vested rights created by clear policy assurances.
The High Court allowed delay in filing GST appeal due to repeated family bereavements beyond the taxpayer’s control. Key takeaway: genuine hardship can justify condonation and enable appeal on merits.
Court held that penalty under Section 270A cannot apply where assessed income does not exceed processed income. Key takeaway: statutory conditions must be strictly met.
The Court held that reassessment proceedings must be initiated within the statutory time limit. It found the notice issued after the deadline to be invalid.
The Court found that the authority failed to follow mandatory procedure under Rule 92(3) before rejecting the refund. It held that absence of hearing and improper notice rendered the order invalid.
Madras High Court held that use of visual identifiers on packaging like fonts, symbols, colours, etc. establishes brandname for GST purpose. However, since there was no suppression of fact invocation of extended period denied.
The Court examined whether employees could be penalised under Section 122(1A) for company-level GST violations. It held that only “taxable persons” fall within the scope of the provision, excluding employees without independent registration.
The case examined whether a lower TDS certificate applies prospectively or for the full year. The Court held it applies to the entire assessment year, negating default and interest liability.
Avanti Feeds Limited Vs Deputy Commissioner of State Tax (Andhra Pradesh High Court) The writ petition before the Andhra Pradesh High Court concerned the jurisdiction to assess and recover Integrated Goods and Services Tax (IGST) on imported goods and the authority of State GST officers to initiate proceedings in relation to such imports. The petitioner, […]
