The Calcutta High Court dismissed a writ petition challenging a consolidated GST show cause notice for multiple financial years, holding that the taxpayer had an effective appellate remedy under Section 107 of the CGST Act. The Court kept all issues relating to limitation and jurisdiction open for the appellate authority.
The Calcutta High Court held that Income Tax Returns filed prior to the victim’s death could not be viewed with suspicion while assessing compensation. The Court enhanced compensation after reducing personal expense deduction from 50% to one-third.
The Calcutta High Court held that proceedings based on Rule 96(10) of the CGST Rules could not continue after the provision was omitted without any saving clause. The Court quashed the GST refund demand order passed after deletion of the rule.
The Calcutta High Court set aside the order passed under Section 148A(d) after holding that failure to grant a personal hearing amounted to violation of principles of natural justice.
The Calcutta High Court held that reassessment proceedings for AY 2015-16 must comply with the amended limitation provisions under Section 149 effective from 01.09.2024. The Court quashed the notices as time-barred due to absence of material showing escaped income above Rs. 50 lakh.
The Calcutta High Court ruled that a CFS operator remained liable to pay cost recovery charges even without formal sanction of customs posts. The Court applied the doctrine of “substance over form” after finding that customs supervision and services were continuously provided.
The Calcutta High Court dismissed a money recovery suit after finding that the lender failed to produce a valid licence under the Bengal Money Lenders Act, 1940. The Court held that Section 13 bars courts from granting decrees in favour of unlicensed money lenders.
The Court held that common trade parlance and industry understanding treated the goods as plastic sacks rather than textile products. This finding supported classification under HSN 3923.
The Court directed the appellate authority to accept manual filing of Form GST APL-01 after the taxpayer could not upload the appeal electronically due to a technical glitch. Delay in filing was also condoned under the CGST Act.
The Court ruled that liability to pay additional tax arises only after the reciprocating State grants countersignature to the permit. Tax demands raised before countersignature were held to be without jurisdiction.
