Delhi High Court held reassessment under Sections 147/148 cannot be initiated merely on an internal audit objection. Absence of new tangible material made reopening invalid.
The Court ruled that reopening based solely on an audit objection amounts to change of opinion if the issue was previously examined. Without fresh tangible material, reassessment proceedings are unsustainable.
Kerala High Court held that importer mis-declared semi-dried dates imported by them as fresh dates hence IGST exemption wrongly claimed. Further, importer approached to amend bill of entry only after initiation of proceedings under section 28, accordingly, amendment is not permissible.
The High Court held that Rule 86A does not permit blocking of input tax credit beyond the amount available in the Electronic Credit Ledger. Negative balance entries were set aside as unsustainable.
The Madras High Court set aside a GST assessment order as no personal hearing was granted, even though notices were uploaded on the portal. The Court held that mere portal service without effective opportunity violates principles of fairness.
The Bombay High Court held that a pending penalty appeal qualifies as a “dispute” under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme. Rejection solely for absence of assessment appeal was set aside
The Court held that payment of principal tax does not exempt a taxpayer from the mandatory 10% pre-deposit for appealing penalty. Compliance with Section 107(6) is compulsory.
The High Court held that reassessment cannot be based on grounds not mentioned in the original Section 148A notice. Since no income had escaped assessment, the reopening was quashed.
The Court ruled that provisional attachment under Section 83(1) cannot continue beyond one year as per Section 83(2). The attachment order was held to have lapsed by operation of law.
The Court held that allegations of forged extension and duress require factual examination by the Adjudicating Authority, maintaining status quo on seized gold and cash.
