Gujarat High Court held that re-opening sought on the basis of assessment record without any fresh tangible material is unsustainable in law.
Madras High Court directed the Chartered Accountant, who raised several allegations against the then President of the Institute, that if he is confident about the irregularities and has materials on record to establish the allegations, he is at liberty to register a case before the Competent Authority, including the Central Vigilance Commission or the Jurisdictional Police or otherwise.
Issue involved Whether department is enjoined to issue a notice under subsection 3 of Section 61 of CGST Act, 2017 once returns have been submitted by assessee before initiating action under Section 74 or not?
Bombay High Court held that license fee is the price or the consideration for parting with such privilege, which is exclusively owned and controlled by the State Government. Complying with provisions of section 13A of the Goa Public Gambling Act requires payment of the same.
Bombay High Court held that the Goa Value Added Tax (12th Amendment) Act, 2020 is an impermissible judicial override defying the doctrine of separation of powers. Accordingly, respondents, based on the same, cannot deny any of the petitioners the benefits of earlier judicial decisions.
Chhattisgarh High Court directed works contractor involved in construction of road, bridges, tolls, etc. to make fresh claim showing difference of tax liability that was incurred at the time of submission of bids and excess tax paid in light of introduction of GST levying higher tax on works contract services.
Madras High Court allowed/ directed petitioner to furnish pending returns as due to health issue GST returns were not filed continuously for period of 3 months which resulted into cancellation of registration.
Madras High Court held that as the petitioner company is wound up, however, intention of petitioner for clearing the pending dues is sincere. Writ petition is allowed permitting the petitioner to pay pending dues in equal installments.
Advancing reasons for non-payment of service tax even though collected, it has been submitted by the appellant that during the relevant period, they were under severe financial crisis. In my view, this cannot be a reasonable cause for non-payment of service tax even though collected from the customers but not deposited with the Government.
SCN is deficient if it does not sufficiently disclose reasons why petitioner’s GST Registration was suspended or was proposed to be cancelled
