The High Court declined to implead a Minister after the District Collector clarified that a prohibitory order did not intend to hinder compliance with a prior court direction. The Court held that contrary public statements cannot override judicial verdicts.
The Allahabad High Court held that tax determination under GST cannot be made against a deceased person. The demand order was quashed as no notice was issued to the legal representative.
The High Court ruled that the CESTAT acted within its powers by remanding the case to verify certificates for service tax exemption and held that such an order did not warrant interference.
SA Aromatics Pvt Ltd and another Vs Union of India and 5 others (Allahabad High Court) The Allahabad High Court decided a batch of writ petitions challenging proceedings initiated under Sections 73 and 74 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and the U.P. Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The petitions raised […]
The Court ruled that a person who is neither a director, shareholder, nor employee of a company cannot be made liable for its tax dues through attachment of a personal bank account.
The Delhi High Court held that issuing a 15% withholding certificate without properly considering the Supreme Court’s ruling was legally unsustainable. The Court reduced the tax deduction rate to 2% for the relevant year.
The High Court revoked cancellation of GST registration after accepting the petitioner’s explanation of financial and health difficulties. Restoration was granted subject to filing pending returns and payment of dues within fixed timelines.
The High Court flagged serious flaws in a GST adjudication order that cited non-existent and unrelated judgments. It indicated the need for safeguards to prevent blind reliance on incorrect legal precedents.
The High Court set aside income tax assessments after holding that a specific written request for personal hearing cannot be rejected on technical grounds such as failure to activate a portal link. The ruling underscores that natural justice must be upheld in faceless proceedings.
The Calcutta High Court held that an appellate authority must independently evaluate the grounds of appeal and supporting explanations. Repeating the adjudicating officer’s findings without analysis renders the order invalid.
