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 Court granted interim relief in a petition challenging GST under RCM on development rights. It recognized the issue as already under judicial scrutiny in a similar case.
The Court granted interim relief as the issue matched an earlier pending case. It ensured consistency in judicial approach and protected the taxpayer.
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 Court condoned a 687-day delay in filing Form 10B, accepting the explanation of unintentional oversight in online filing. It held that denial of exemption due to such delay would be unjust, especially for a charitable trust.
Relying on binding precedent, the Court issued directions to resolve overlapping GST inquiries. It stressed adherence to structured coordination mechanisms between authorities.
The Court held that serious medical conditions justified delay in filing a revised return. It directed reopening of the ITBA portal to enable compliance while allowing scrutiny on merits.
The Court examined whether an FIR without prior sanction under GST law is sustainable. It allowed investigation but restrained arrest and barred filing of the charge sheet pending further hearing.
The Court held that rejecting condonation solely because the assessment year was not mentioned in the circular is unjustified. It ruled that beneficial circulars must be applied liberally to address genuine hardship.
