Madras High Court held that date of receipt of copy of order is to be accepted in absence of any contrary evidence by the respondents/ department. Accordingly, dismissal of appeal on ground of limitation not justified. Hence, matter remanded back for fresh consideration.
Gujarat High Court held that since petitioner has generated Part-A of the E-Way Bill covering all the transport related details, the benefit of the Circular No.64/38/2018-GST is required to be given, hence the penalty amount is reduced.
Revenue submitted that the order was issued in order to meet statutory limitation deadlines. During the hearing, both assessee and the authority agreed that assessee had an alternate remedy under Section 246A, along with the option to seek condonation of delay under Section 249(3).
Once it was held that there was an independent and separate sale of the HDPE bags in which the cement was sold, there was no question of levying any sales tax at the same rate as that levied on cement.
No recovery of outstanding GST ( Goods and Services Tax ) demand could be made once a taxpayer deposited the statutory pre-deposit under Section 112(8) of the CGST Act and filed an undertaking to approach the Appellate Tribunal when it become functional.
Bombay High Court held that secured creditors have a clear priority over the dues of the State as per Section 26E of the SARFAESI Act. Thus, clear title must pass to auction purchaser and State cannot be allowed to continue its encumbrance upon secured asset sold.
Karnataka High Court held that the assessment order passed is beyond the time limit prescribed under Section 144C(13) of Income Tax Act. Accordingly, the appeal is disposed of.
Allahabad High Court voids a GST registration cancellation, citing a contradictory order that revealed non-application of mind and a lack of due process.
Allahabad High Court sets aside a GST registration cancellation, citing violations of natural justice, including improper notice and lack of a hearing.
Karnataka High Court held that challenge by revenue to the order of remand passed by Tribunal wouldn’t survive for further consideration hence appeal disposed of and question of taxability of software fees under DTAA not answered.
