The court interpreted the scope of Section 91 CrPC in summoning documents. It ruled that parties cannot demand documents as a matter of right. The judgment stresses that relevance is the key criterion.
Calcutta High Court rejects Revenue appeal, ruling CBIC’s ₹1 crore threshold applies where no penalty survives. It upholds that a Customs Broker cannot be penalised without proof of mens rea, affirming Tribunal’s finding of a mere conduit role.
The case involved denial of exemption on petroleum-based turnover due to missing evidence. The Court held that the matter should be reconsidered after giving the assessee an opportunity to submit supporting documents.
The case involved issuance of notice only through the portal after cancellation of registration. The Court held that absence of physical service violated natural justice and invalidated the order.
The case questions validity of time-extension notifications allegedly issued without GST Council approval. The Court found arguable issues and granted interim protection against enforcement.
The case addressed ambiguity in penalty proceedings where the specific charge was not identified. The Court upheld deletion of penalty due to lack of clarity in the notice.
The issue involved delay in processing an NOC application due to alleged disputes over development rights. The Court held that without any injunction, authorities cannot indefinitely withhold approval.
The Court held that absence of cogent reasoning on jurisdiction and time-bar issues invalidated the order. The matter was remanded for fresh adjudication.
The Court held that GST authorities cannot rely on seized documents that are missing or untraceable during adjudication. It ruled that proceedings must be based only on available records with fair hearing.
The Court allowed the taxpayer to file a fresh application for revocation of GST registration after failing to reply to the show cause notice. It held that the authority must consider the new application independently.
