The Telangana High Court refused to interfere with a faceless income tax assessment order despite claims of medical hardship and lack of opportunity. The Court held that repeated adjournments and failure to seek video conferencing weakened the taxpayer’s natural justice argument.
The Telangana High Court set aside the appellate order rejecting the GST appeal and remanded the matter for fresh adjudication after granting an opportunity of hearing. The Court held that principles of natural justice must be followed even in GST appellate proceedings.
The Telangana High Court directed GST authorities to accept a manual application for revocation of cancelled GST registration. The Court granted relief where the GST portal did not permit online filing due to expiry of the prescribed time limit.
The Telangana High Court permitted the taxpayer to file a delayed GST appeal against the Order-in-Original and DRC-07 summary order. The Court directed the appellate authority to consider delay condonation sympathetically since the taxpayer had been pursuing writ proceedings before the High Court.
The Calcutta High Court held that the assessing officer misconstrued CBDT Circular No. 11 of 2024 while rejecting carry forward of loss due to a seven-day filing delay. The Court directed the authorities to condone the delay and process the return according to law.
The Telangana High Court dismissed a writ petition challenging a Section 73 GST order and attachment proceedings, holding that the matter was covered by the Supreme Court decision in Glaxo Smith Kline Consumer Health Care Limited.
The High Court ruled that reopening under Sections 147 and 148 was unsustainable because the Assessing Officer’s reasons amounted only to suspicion and not a valid reason to believe income had escaped assessment.
Telangana High Court directed GST authorities to accept a physical revocation application where the GST portal no longer permitted online filing due to expiry of limitation. The Court granted relief after noting that registration was cancelled for non-filing of returns.
The Madras High Court held that penalties under Section 122 of the CGST Act must equal the ineligible ITC availed or passed on in circular trading cases. The Court ruled that the Rs.10,000 limit cannot apply where the statute uses the phrase “whichever is higher.”
Telangana High Court held that the taxpayer may seek rectification under Section 161 of the CGST Act where allegations of overlapping GST proceedings arise for the same tax period. The Court directed authorities to consider the rectification application after granting hearing opportunity.
