The court held that dismissal of an appeal solely for delay was unsustainable where notices were uploaded under an obscure portal tab and service was not proved, restoring the matter for fresh adjudication.
The court held that tax liability cannot be increased at the appellate stage on a new ground without giving the assessee an opportunity of hearing. Enhancement without following Section 107(11) was set aside and remanded.
The Court set aside an assessment passed despite an existing stay order, holding that proceedings undertaken in violation of judicial restraint cannot stand.
The Court examined whether tax authorities could recover the full disputed tax despite pending appellate remedies. It held that recovery beyond the statutory pre-deposit limits under GST law was impermissible.
The Court set aside a reassessment order passed in the name of a deceased assessee, holding that proceedings cannot continue after authorities are informed of death. Fresh proceedings may be initiated against legal representatives as per law.
The High Court declined to entertain a writ petition against cancellation of GST registration as an effective statutory remedy existed. The taxpayer was directed to seek revocation before the proper officer.
The High Court examined whether a delayed GST appeal could be rejected outright. Balancing equities, it allowed the appeal to be heard on merits subject to payment of costs, setting aside the dismissal order.
The High Court held that a review cannot be entertained without a clear error or new evidence. Re-arguing the case on merits was found impermissible.
The Court admitted the writ challenging GST orders where proceedings were initiated beyond the prescribed period. Recovery was stayed subject to a 10% deposit, highlighting limits on delayed adjudication.
The High Court held that refunds cannot be adjusted against a demand already stayed by the Assessing Officer. It directed refund of amounts adjusted despite the assessee being treated as not in default.
