The Bombay High Court upheld the ITAT’s decision to admit an additional TP ground allowing reconsideration of AEs as the tested party. It held that no substantial question of law arose where the Tribunal remanded the issue for fresh factual examination.
The High Court refused bail, holding that prima facie material showed demand and partial acceptance of illegal gratification. Such allegations were found to seriously undermine public confidence in the justice system.
The Court permitted interim release of seized imported goods upon payment of quantified enhanced duty and furnishing a bank guarantee. It clarified that adjudication proceedings may continue independently.
The High Court held that the petitioner had duly submitted the original title deed as security and directed the Department to trace and return it within a fixed time.
The issue was whether ITAT could reject appeals after an administrative transfer. The High Court ruled such dismissals are invalid and appeals must be heard on merits.
The Supreme Court held that belated payment alone cannot defeat society membership where lawful occupation and valid AGM resolutions exist. The key takeaway is that delay affects only financial consequences, not the right to membership.
The High Court held that limitation for filing a GST appeal must be computed after disposal of a rectification application. Rejection of the appeal without examining this aspect was found invalid.
Addition under Section 68 cannot be sustained merely due to high share premium when investors are identifiable, traceable, and supported by audited financial records.
Summons under Section 70 of the CGST Act was only a step in the process of inquiry. Mere issuance of summons could not be equated with arrest or initiation of recovery proceedings.
The High Court set aside the assessment after finding that the order was passed before the scheduled video hearing. The ruling underscores that granting a requested personal hearing under Section 144B is mandatory.
