The Court held that GSTIN cannot be cancelled solely based on supplier irregularities without examining the taxpayer’s transactions. The matter was remanded due to absence of independent findings.
The case examined whether a modified return could be scrutinized again after assessment. The ruling clarified that once assessment is completed considering reorganisation, further scrutiny is impermissible.
The Court granted interim relief in a petition challenging GST under RCM on development rights. It recognized the issue as already under judicial scrutiny in a similar case.
The Court granted interim relief as the issue matched an earlier pending case. It ensured consistency in judicial approach and protected the taxpayer.
The Court condoned a 687-day delay in filing Form 10B, accepting the explanation of unintentional oversight in online filing. It held that denial of exemption due to such delay would be unjust, especially for a charitable trust.
The Court held that serious medical conditions justified delay in filing a revised return. It directed reopening of the ITBA portal to enable compliance while allowing scrutiny on merits.
The Court held that a 21-month delay in recording the satisfaction note violates the requirement of immediacy. It ruled that such delay renders proceedings time-barred and invalid.
The issue involved denial of refund on the ground that services were intermediary in nature. The Court held that absence of findings on the agreement and nature of services invalidated the order. The matter was remanded for fresh adjudication with proper analysis.
The issue involved whether fresh scrutiny could be initiated after filing a modified return under Section 170A. The Court held that where assessment is already completed, the AO can only modify income to give effect to reorganisation.
The judgment clarifies that subsequent departmental communications do not extend limitation periods. The appeal must be filed against the original order within statutory timelines.
