Tripura High Court held that an order accepting bond under section 88 of the Code of Criminal Procedure [CrPC]from the accused doesn’t amount to a grant of bail. Accordingly, the present bail application is disposed of.
The Court held that the negative blocking of Input Tax Credit under Rule 86A CGST was ultra vires, directing authorities to restore ₹5.56 lakh ITC within 15 days, reaffirming taxpayer rights.
Rajasthan High Court held that discretionary remedy claimed by the petitioner not granted as it is a case which involves fraudulent availment of GST Input Tax Credit exceeding Rs. 100 Crore. Accordingly, writ petition dismissed.
The High Court held that a show cause order passed ex parte before the expiry of the response period violated natural justice. The case was remitted for fresh adjudication with proper hearing.
The Tribunal directed the AO to verify conditions for exemption of receipts from tribal-area schools, confirming the Trust’s eligibility. The ruling reinforces that factual verification cannot override established charitable purposes and exemptions.
Gujarat High Court held that recommendation of name of Chartered Accountant from the Register of Member based on disciplinary committee report quashed as report was merely a cut-paste job without any independent finding.
The Allahabad High Court struck down a GST cancellation order that provided no reasons for rejecting the taxpayer’s explanation, emphasizing procedural fairness and protection of business interests.
The Court held that interest paid for delayed Agricultural Income Tax cannot be deducted under Section 37. Since AIT itself is not deductible, the related interest also fails eligibility. The ruling confirms that such payments do not qualify as business expenditure.
The Court held that the taxpayer approached without replying to the GST show cause notice. It directed submission of a reply within one week, which the authorities must consider.
The High Court sustained the exemption under Section 11 for a charitable trust, holding that doctors’ fees excluded from gross billing do not affect the 2% Indigent Patient Fund contribution. Revenue’s appeal was dismissed.
