The High Court held that the application seeking to set aside the auction sale was not legally maintainable. It upheld the DRAT’s decision restoring the Recovery Officer’s order and directed completion of the sale process.
Jageswar Saw Vs Deputy Commissioner of Revenue (Calcutta High Court) The Calcutta High Court dismissed an appeal challenging detention of an excavator and levy of penalty under Section 129 of the West Bengal GST Act, 2017, holding that incorrect declaration in transport documents and improper execution of delivery challan justified action by the tax authorities. […]
The Calcutta High Court held that deduction and deposit of TDS constituted acknowledgment of a loan transaction and jural relationship. The Court granted interim protection after finding the respondent’s denial of liability inconsistent with its stand before Income Tax authorities.
The Calcutta High Court condoned a 430-day delay after holding that the death of the assessee’s authorized representative constituted sufficient cause in the faceless tax regime. The Court set aside the ITAT’s dismissal order and restored the appeal for adjudication on merits.
High Court held that customs regulations require verification through reliable documents and data, not mandatory physical inspection of a client’s premises.
The issue involved recovery despite statutory pre-deposit under GST law. The Court held that once pre-deposit is made, further recovery must stop and excess amounts should be refunded.
The case involved denial of GST refund due to unclear documentation on shipping details. The Court held that the assessee must be given a chance to submit proper evidence and ordered fresh adjudication.
The issue involved denial of access to seized documents relied upon in a GST notice. The Court held that taxpayers must be given inspection and copies of relied documents before responding.
Court found that the appellant failed to clearly identify which exceptional clause applied. Since the tax effect was below Rs.2 crores and no valid exception was demonstrated, the Court held that there was no reason to entertain the appeal. Accordingly, the appeal and the connected application were dismissed.
The Court held that rejection of NBFC registration surrender solely due to meeting PBC was unsustainable without giving an opportunity of hearing. RBI was directed to reconsider the application afresh.
