The High Court set aside a GST demand after finding that no personal hearing was granted under Section 75(4). The ruling reiterates that adverse GST orders cannot be passed without following mandatory hearing requirements.
The Court held that the petitioner suppressed the fact of an earlier withdrawn writ challenging the same order. The petition was dismissed with costs and limited relief granted only for statutory application.
The Court held that issuing two interest demands for delay in filing GSTR-3B for the same period amounted to duplication and double taxation, and quashed the second order.
The Court considered a request to permit limited operation of a frozen account for salary payments. It deferred interim relief and directed disclosure of employee details for respondent’s verification.
The High Court upheld rejection of a belated revision filed nearly seven years after rectification denial. It ruled that no sufficient cause was shown to condone the inordinate delay.
The court held that a reassessment notice issued by the jurisdictional officer violated the faceless assessment scheme. As a result, the notice and the consequential assessment order were set aside, subject to liberty if higher courts take a different view.
The issue arose where cancellation relied on grounds not stated in the show cause notice. The court ordered merits adjudication after restoring the appeal with costs.
The court declined to entertain a fresh writ challenging entry tax where the petitioner had not filed an earlier petition. The ruling clarifies that Supreme Court-granted revival applies only to previously dismissed writs.
The Court ruled that a reference seeking overseas tax information for an ineligible assessment year was impermissible, preventing extension of the limitation period and rendering the assessment time-barred.
The Court refused to interfere with ex-parte GST orders where the taxpayer failed to reply or attend hearings. Blaming a professional advisor was held insufficient to bypass statutory procedure.
