The Rajasthan High Court refused bail in a case involving alleged GST fraud of ₹74 crores through 555 fake firms. The Court held that the seriousness of allegations outweighed the plea for release.
The Court held that once arrears for later years were settled under the Settlement Act, no outstanding demand survived. Adjusting earlier refunds against settled dues was declared illegal and without authority of law.
The Court quashed the denial of GST refund, holding that the appellate authority failed to properly analyse whether services to the parent company qualified as export or intermediary services. Matter remanded for fresh decision.
Observing that six out of ten heirs supported the nominee and only one objected, the Court restored the membership decision. It held that revisional interference was unwarranted in absence of eligibility dispute.
The Court quashed GST adjudication orders on excess ITC for violating Sections 75(4) and 75(6) due to absence of reasons and denial of hearing, directing fresh proceedings with proper particulars.
The High Court quashed the adjudication order after finding that the authority failed to consider uncontroverted submissions on valid tax invoices and GSTR filings, directing fresh hearing.
The Bombay High Court permitted videography of statements and allowed an advocate to sit at a visible but not audible distance during a Section 70 CGST inquiry. The relief was granted considering the petitioner’s medical condition and willingness to cooperate.
The High Court held that failure to conduct mandatory pre-show cause consultation rendered the tax proceedings unsustainable, and remanded the matter to CESTAT for fresh decision on merits.
The High Court dismissed Revenue appeals after holding that the assessee’s activities were charitable in nature, making it eligible for exemption under Section 11. The ruling followed the Supreme Court’s precedent and settled multiple connected tax issues.
The High Court entertained a writ challenging Section 168A notifications, holding that absence of force majeure and alleged breach of natural justice raised a strong arguable case. Recovery was stayed.
