The issue involved lack of operational GST Tribunal despite its formal constitution. The Court noted that this forces taxpayers to approach the High Court unnecessarily. The key takeaway is that authorities must ensure timely functionality of statutory tribunals.
The issue involved penalty despite proper documentation. The Court held that valid invoice and e-way bill establish ownership, making action under Section 129(1)(b) invalid.
The issue involved whether valuation for release should follow invoice value or enhanced value. The Court held that Section 129(1)(a) applies, mandating release based on invoice valuation.
The issue involved taxing property value as unexplained investment without prior notice. The Court held that absence of a show cause notice under Section 69 violated principles of natural justice, leading to quashing of the order.
The issue involved whether objections to land acquisition were time-barred. The Court held that the limitation period begins from newspaper publication, making the objections valid and rejecting the challenge.
Delhi High Court held that property acquired from proceeds of crime before Prevention of Money Laundering Act can be attached u/s. 5(1) since possession continued after Prevention of Money Laundering Act came into force.
A petition concerning money laundering, illegal mining and granite quarrying was dismissed as the Court found sufficient averments disclosing cognizable offence against assessee
Bombay High Court held that import of cosmetic goods without Central Drugs Standard Control Organization license are considered prohibited goods hence the same are liable to be confiscated even if the same were meant for re-export.
Telangana High Court held that in cases involving allegations of fraudulent availment of ITC since transactions are spread across several years issuance of consolidated notice permissible. Writ petition is dismissed due to availability of efficacious alternative remedy of appeal u/s. 107(1) of the Act.
High Court held that consideration received for assignment of self-generated trademarks prior to 2002 amendment could not be taxed as capital gains because no cost of acquisition could be determined.
