The issue involved penalty despite proper documentation. The Court held that valid invoice and e-way bill establish ownership, making action under Section 129(1)(b) invalid.
The issue involved whether valuation for release should follow invoice value or enhanced value. The Court held that Section 129(1)(a) applies, mandating release based on invoice valuation.
The Court held that failure to address objections regarding sample mismatch vitiates the order. It directed fresh adjudication with proper reasoning.
The Court refused to interfere as the writ petition was filed after completion of reassessment proceedings. It held that factual disputes must be examined through statutory appeal, not writ jurisdiction.
The High Court held that goods transported without an e-way bill and supported by an invalid invoice from a suspended supplier cannot be released. The absence of valid documents justified detention and penalty.
The Court held that refund rejection on limitation grounds was invalid as authorities failed to consider the Supreme Court’s COVID-related exclusion period. It directed fresh adjudication with hearing.
The High Court held that authorities cannot restrict the number of Namaz worshipers citing law and order concerns. It stated that maintaining peace is the responsibility of the administration.
The High Court held that cancellation of GST registration without granting a personal hearing violates Section 75(4) of the GST Act. The order was quashed and the authority was directed to reconsider the matter after hearing the taxpayer.
The Court held that the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 applies to maintenance claims against children or relatives, not disputes over property obstruction by neighbours.
The court refused bail after noting allegations that employee provident funds were invested in a private financial institution in violation of statutory provisions and government guidelines.
