The Karnataka High Court allowed the petition, declaring the reassessment order and all related penalty notices for AY 2016-17 invalid because the initial proceedings were initiated without proper jurisdictional approval under Section 151A. The judgment underscores the critical nature of procedural integrity in faceless assessments, reserving the right for the department to reinstate the case based on a future Supreme Court ruling.
Karnataka High Court quashed reassessment notices and orders for AY 2019-20, ruling they were issued without proper jurisdiction and violated the framework of Section 151A. This decision voids the proceedings due to a jurisdictional defect, granting the Revenue liberty to revive the case only after the Supreme Court’s final decision.
Karnataka High Court set aside reassessment proceedings for AY 2020-21, ruling the jurisdictional Assessing Officer acted beyond the scope of Section 151A (Faceless Assessment). The decision reinforces that reassessment notices must strictly follow the procedural mandate of the faceless regime, though the Revenue retains the liberty to revive the case if the Supreme Court validates the procedure.
The J&K High Court set aside a GST demand of ₹15.44 Lakh, ruling that authorities must consider a taxpayer’s reply to a Show Cause Notice if received before the final assessment order is passed.
The Allahabad High Court stayed a ₹110 Cr GST demand on Dabur India’s Hajmola Candy, citing a Supreme Court precedent that previously settled the product’s classification issue.
The Allahabad High Court dismissed a writ petition filed by Nippon Tubes Limited, ruling that the detention of goods was justified because the movement of materials to a job worker lacked the mandatory GST delivery challan (Rule 55) and e-way bill, despite the existence of a master tax invoice.
Madras High Court rules on GST notice service via email, clarifies that digital communication must ensure effective notice to uphold natural justice.
The Madras High Court ruled that a GST assessment uploaded after the taxpayer’s registration was cancelled is invalid, as the assessee loses access to the GST portal.
Karnataka HC rules 10 crore collected during a GST search was non-voluntary and illegal. HC ordered department to refund amount with 6% annual interest to taxpayer.
The Bombay High Court ruled that blocking a GST electronic credit ledger under Rule 86A without stating “reason to believe” and offering a timely post-decisional hearing violates natural justice.
