The court held that orders passed after uploading notices only under the Additional Notices tab, without effective hearing, violate procedural fairness. The matter was remanded for fresh adjudication with proper notice.
The issue was whether portal uploading alone amounts to valid service. The Court restrained coercive action, holding that authorities must follow statutory service modes.
The issue was whether tax authorities could delay a GST refund ordered by the Appellate Authority due to a contemplated appeal. The Court held that unless the appellate order is stayed or set aside, it must be implemented.
Ruling on Section 140 of the CGST Act and Rule 142, the Court allowed use of transitioned credit via DRC-03 for pre-deposit. The decision removes a procedural barrier to appellate remedies.
The Court granted bail noting that the alleged accountant was not the primary beneficiary of the fraudulent ITC. Custody period, limited punishment, and parity with a co-accused weighed in favour of release.
The High Court quashed a retrospective GST cancellation where the show cause notice did not propose such action, holding that cancellation orders must align with the scope of the notice.
The Court held that SIM cards, recharge coupons, and value-added telecom services are not “goods” under the KVAT Act. VAT demands on such receipts were therefore set aside.
The Court accepted that stereo systems installed in e-rickshaws qualify as inputs used in the course of business. Refund of unutilised ITC under the inverted duty structure was directed.
The court examined whether earlier liquidation orders could be recalled in light of a sanctioned revival proposal. It held that recall was justified after the holding company undertook full liability and the Government raised no objection.
The High Court held that arrest made before the time fixed in a statutory appearance notice violated mandatory procedure. The ruling clarifies that such non-compliance renders the arrest infirm, justifying grant of bail.
