The High Court suspended the blockage of ITC after noting that adverse third-party material was not supplied before passing the order. Interim relief was granted subject to deposit already made.
Whether interest can be demanded without being specified in the show cause notice. Ruling & Takeaway: The Court held that interest not quantified in the notice cannot be added later, reaffirming strict compliance with Section 75(7).
The High Court found that the appeal was rejected ex-parte without valid service of hearing notice. The ruling stresses that portal uploading alone is insufficient when communication is disputed.
The High Court set aside GST orders where the show cause notice was served only on the portal after cancellation of registration, holding that principles of natural justice were violated.
The High Court set aside a GST demand where no show cause notice or hearing opportunity was given. The ruling reiterates that adjudication without due notice violates natural justice.
The High Court disposed of the writ petition after noting that the GST Appellate Tribunal had been constituted and made operational. Petitioners were permitted to pursue the statutory appeal remedy.
The High Court quashed a GST adjudication order after finding that no personal hearing was granted before passing an adverse decision, in violation of mandatory procedural safeguards.
The court held that the Deputy Commissioner had valid jurisdiction under Section 74 due to lawful sub-delegation by the Commissioner. The key takeaway is that administrative orders can validly assign GST adjudicatory functions.
Issue involved whether adjudication fails if cross-examination under Section 138B is not provided. The Court held that cross-examination is mandatory only when specifically sought, and the Tribunal erred by presuming a violation without deciding this factual issue.
The Court set aside a GST demand that exceeded the amount proposed in the show-cause notice. The ruling reinforces the statutory cap under Section 75(7) on confirmed demands.
