The High Court held that general penalty under Section 125 cannot be imposed when late fee is already levied under GST law. The court therefore removed the penalty while confirming the late fee liability.
The High Court held that reassessment proceedings must follow proper procedure when the assessee is deceased. The tax authority must issue notice to the legal representative before initiating proceedings.
The High Court held that a claim for refund of money deposited under a commercial plot allotment scheme arises from contractual obligations. Such disputes must be pursued before a civil court and cannot be decided in writ jurisdiction.
Calcutta High Court held that GST circulars issued in 2022 cannot retrospectively restrict refund claims when the taxpayer’s right to claim refund had already accrued and the application was filed within the statutory limitation period under Section 54.
The High Court quashed the appellate order rejecting a GST appeal on the ground of manual filing. The Court held that once the authority accepted the appeal and heard it on merits, it could not dismiss it later on a technical ground.
The Court observed that show cause notices had clearly provided opportunities for personal hearing and submission of documents. It directed payment of costs after finding the allegation of denial of natural justice to be false.
The High Court held that a tax notice and assessment issued in the name of a company that had already merged into another entity were invalid. The ruling clarifies that once the tax authority is informed of a merger, proceedings must be issued in the name of the transferee company.
The High Court declined to implead a Minister after the District Collector clarified that a prohibitory order did not intend to hinder compliance with a prior court direction. The Court held that contrary public statements cannot override judicial verdicts.
The Allahabad High Court held that tax determination under GST cannot be made against a deceased person. The demand order was quashed as no notice was issued to the legal representative.
The High Court ruled that the CESTAT acted within its powers by remanding the case to verify certificates for service tax exemption and held that such an order did not warrant interference.
