High Court held that goods and conveyance detained under GST must be released once penalty is paid, where authorities failed to initiate confiscation after statutory period. Mere delay in payment did not justify continued detention.
The High Court quashed a penalty show cause notice issued under Section 122, holding that jurisdiction cannot be assumed merely on the basis of a general notification. Fresh proceedings were permitted in accordance with law.
Andhra Pradesh High Court held that State becomes liable to compensation on account of theft of seized silver and cash which was carried out in the police station. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed.
Andhra Pradesh High Court held that supply of electricity by petitioner to Power Trading Corporation of India is not export supply of goods and hence refund is not admissible. However, directed to claim refund of ITC relating to supply of electricity directly to Bangladesh Power Development Board.
Andhra Pradesh held that neither the State Legislature nor the Central Legislature would have power, to levy tax on the sale of goods made beyond the territorial waters of India. Accordingly, writ petition disposed of setting aside the assessment orders and remanded the matter back.
The High Court quashed a GST assessment holding that solar power contracts must be taxed at an effective 8.9% under applicable notifications, not 18%.
The court held that interest is payable when the actual refund is made after the statutory 90-day period, even if the refund order was passed earlier.
Relying on the spirit of Section 62, the Court ruled that compliance after delay nullifies best judgment assessments, though interest liability may remain.
The judgment clarified that delayed installment interest arises from a debtor–creditor relationship, not a service supply, and therefore cannot be subjected to GST.
The High Court held that assessment orders under Section 62 of the CGST Act automatically lapse once pending returns are filed with late fee, barring recovery action.
