Karnataka High Court confirms that secured creditors can recover dues from property before GST claims if their SARFAESI Act charge predates the GST encumbrance, ensuring proper auction proceedings.
Commissioner of Customs Vs Sudhir Gulati (Delhi High Court) Delhi High Court held that DRI are proper officers for the purpose of Section 28 of the Customs Act, 1962 and accordingly has been empowered to issue demand notice under section 28. Accordingly, appeal of department allowed. Facts- The present appeal has been filed by the […]
Bombay High Court held that Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax cannot exceed mandate of Section 144C(13) or act contrary to Dispute Resolution Panel’s directions. It further ruled that any assessment completed beyond prescribed time limit under Section 144C(13) is time-barred and invalid.
Delhi High Court dismissed a writ petition, directing taxpayers to approach the appellate authority as an alternate remedy in cases of fraudulent availment of Input Tax Credit, emphasizing proper legal recourse.
Gujarat High Court ruled that reassessment under Section 148 issued after the permissible time period is invalid, quashing the notice and allowing the writ petition.
Delhi High Court ruled that the Supreme Court’s suo motu Covid orders extending limitation periods apply to PMLA cases, as the Act contains no express exclusion.
Gujarat High Court held that reversing the order sanctioning refund not justified since evidences placed on records are not considered and further petitioner has duly complied with provisions of rule 89(2)(c) of the GST Rules. Accordingly, petition is allowed and order is quashed.
HC held that large cash payments exceeding Rs.20,000 may be exempt if properly substantiated under Rule 6DD and business needs; Tribunal’s earlier disallowance set aside.
Court held that taxpayers whose GST registration stands cancelled cannot be expected to access e-notices, setting aside an order issued without physical service.
Summary of Agrawal Soya Extracts (P.) Ltd. vs. Union of India where the MP High Court applied the Supreme Court’s Armour Security precedent, mandating GST authorities to decide on jurisdiction and prevent parallel investigations if a show cause notice is already issued on the same subject matter under Section 6(2)(b) of the CGST Act.
