The Court refused to interfere as the writ petition was filed after completion of reassessment proceedings. It held that factual disputes must be examined through statutory appeal, not writ jurisdiction.
The Court held that administrative delay in releasing seized jewellery violated CBDT-prescribed timelines. It ruled that increased bank guarantee due to rising gold prices cannot be imposed on the taxpayer.
The Court held that refund cannot be denied due to clerical errors in GST returns when export and IGST payment are undisputed. It directed refund with interest under Rule 96.
The High Court held that goods transported without an e-way bill and supported by an invalid invoice from a suspended supplier cannot be released. The absence of valid documents justified detention and penalty.
The Court addressed whether appeals could proceed despite low tax effect. It held that since Rule 8(3A) was already struck down and not in issue, appeals were not maintainable.
The Court held that an assessment order passed in the name of an amalgamating, non-existent entity is void. It ruled that system glitches cannot cure a fundamental jurisdictional defect.
The Court held that rejection of a lower withholding certificate without reasons violates Rule 28AA. It remanded the matter for fresh consideration with a speaking order.
The Court set aside rejection of registration based solely on absence of an irrevocability or dissolution clause. It clarified that such conditions are not prescribed under law and cannot be imposed by authorities.
The Court halted GST proceedings questioning mandatory 1/3rd land deduction. It held that jurisdiction is doubtful as the underlying notification has been challenged as ultra vires.
The High Court held that DRT orders are appealable under Section 18 of the SARFAESI Act. It ruled that writ jurisdiction cannot be invoked without exhausting the statutory remedy.
