High Court allowed restoration of GST registration even after dismissal of appeal on limitation grounds. Relief was granted subject to filing returns and payment of dues.
The Court held that serving notices at an outdated address violates natural justice. The proceedings were set aside and remanded for fresh adjudication.
Orissa High Court held that assessment order set aside as proceedings under section 148 of the Income Tax Act initiated without serving of statutory notice. Accordingly, matter remitted back to AO to serve notice u/s. 148 as not hit by limitation u/s. 149.
The case addressed whether delayed appeals can be entertained through writ jurisdiction. The Court ruled that statutory timelines are mandatory and cannot be circumvented.
Valuation issues alone were not valid grounds for detention of goods in transit in Integrated Goods and Services Tax (IGST) movement, as such matters could not be examined at the stage of interception under Sections 129 and 130.
The Court held that statutory amendments extending the ITC time limit override earlier restrictions. It ruled that ITC for FY 2018-19 can be validly claimed up to November 30, 2021. The demand based on earlier limitation was therefore unsustainable.
The Court quashed the Section 148A(d) order for not aligning with binding Supreme Court decisions. It directed fresh adjudication following the principles laid down in earlier rulings.
The Court held that ignoring the taxpayer’s reply renders the order invalid. It emphasised that adjudication must consider submissions before passing orders.
The Court examined whether reassessment based on search could extend beyond statutory timelines. It held that the notice for AY 2015–16 was issued beyond the permissible ten-year period. The ruling confirms that limitation provisions must be strictly followed.
The Court held that filing NIL returns does not fall within the grounds specified under Section 29(2) of the GST Act. As a result, the cancellation order and show cause notice were declared legally unsustainable.