The Bombay High Court in the case of Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited v. Union of India ruled that mandatory pre-deposits for GST appeals can be fulfilled using the Electronic Credit Ledger, overturning an appellate authority’s decision that required cash payment.
The Allahabad High Court ruled that a single E-Way Bill is valid for multiple invoices, stating minor technical errors should not result in penalties for tax evasion.
The Allahabad High Court has stayed coercive action against Varun Enterprises, who was penalized for not including a “biltee” number on tax invoices.
The Andhra Pradesh High Court ruled that a GST assessment order is invalid and can be challenged if it lacks a Document Identification Number (DIN), even after an appeal is rejected.
The Calcutta High Court refused to intervene in a GST demand order under Section 73, rejecting a writ petition filed eight months late. The Court held that statutory appellate remedies cannot be bypassed when the case does not involve jurisdictional issues or violation of natural justice.
The Calcutta High Court allowed the appeals of KPC Medical College And Hospital, setting aside penalties levied under Section 271(1)(c) and Section 271AAA, ruling that the show cause notices were invalid for failing to specify the exact charge (concealment or inaccurate particulars).
The Calcutta High Court, in Abdul Mannan Vs ITO, set aside a ₹50,000 cost imposed by the ITAT for the restoration of a tax appeal, citing the assessee’s small-trader status and dependency on a negligent consultant.
Karnataka High Court held that date of surrender of bank guarantee to be considered as relevant date for the purpose of claiming refund under section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944. Accordingly, appeal allowed.
Gujarat High Court held that post approval of resolution plan, there could be no occasion whatsoever for department to issue notices. Accordingly, GST notices issued alleging wrong claim of ITC quashed and set aside.
Madras High Court held that inquiry report under Regulation 17 of the Customs Brokers Licensing Regulation, 2018 [CBLR] submitted beyond the period of 90 days is against mandate provided under sub-Regulation (5) of Regulation 17 hence inquiry report is illegal, arbitrary and barred by limitation.
