The High Court set aside the SFIO probe after finding that the Central Government failed to show sufficient material or reasons. The ruling reiterates that investigations cannot be ordered mechanically or on vague allegations.
The Court ruled that a marginal eight-minute delay in filing the return could not justify denial of loss carry forward. The order rejecting condonation was set aside to prevent disproportionate hardship.
The High Court stayed GST demands on co-insurance transactions after noting they were challenged as contrary to binding CBIC circulars, granting interim relief pending replies.
The Court stayed the adjudication order where similar GST classification issues were already pending. Interim relief was granted until final disposal of the petition.
The Court held that a final GST adjudication order passed within three months of the show cause notice violates Section 73 of the CGST Act. Orders issued without granting the statutory minimum response period were declared unsustainable.
The court examined whether a single notice could cover several financial years under GST law. It held that consolidation of multiple tax periods under Section 74 is impermissible.
The Court examined whether a sanction lacking a DIN could sustain income-tax proceedings. It held such sanction invalid and set aside the consequential orders.
The Court will examine whether corporate guarantees issued by a parent company to its subsidiaries amount to a taxable supply under GST, while granting interim protection against coercive action.
Contempt Petition was not maintainable, as the NCLT had independent and effective jurisdiction under Section 425 of the Companies Act, 2013 to punish for contempt of its own orders, including those passed under the IBC.
Bombay High Court held that revisionary order which set aside eviction order is not sustainable in law. Court also held that using AI tool as aid for filing submission without verifying its content is not acceptable.
