The Court held that cancellation based on reasons not mentioned in the SCN is unsustainable. The retrospective cancellation was modified to align with procedural fairness.
The court set aside denial of ITC refund based on intermediary classification without proper examination. It remanded the matter for fresh adjudication considering agreements and legal precedents.
The High Court held that Section 206C(1C) applies only to lawful mining arrangements involving lease or licence. It ruled that compounding fees from illegal mining are outside its scope and not subject to TCS.
The court declined to hear the GST dispute as an appeal remedy existed. It held that pre-deposit requirements cannot justify bypassing statutory remedies.
The court held that the seized quantity was intermediate, making strict bail conditions under Section 37 inapplicable. It granted bail considering custody period and case facts. The ruling clarifies bail eligibility in such cases.
The court held that delay in filing returns can bar deduction under Section 80P. It directed the taxpayer to seek condonation under Section 119(2)(b). The ruling emphasizes compliance with statutory timelines.
The court held that rejecting an appeal solely due to non-appearance is improper. Authorities must consider written submissions and pass a reasoned order. The ruling reinforces fair adjudication principles.
The issue involved cancellation of GST registration for non-filing of returns. The Court held that registration can be revived if pending returns and dues are cleared as per prescribed conditions.
The issue involved cancellation for non-filing of returns during the pandemic. The Court held that registration can be restored subject to filing returns and payment of dues.
The Court addressed whether cancellation for non-filing of returns can be reversed after compliance. It held that authorities may restore registration if returns are filed and dues cleared as per Rule 22(4).
