The court accepted an undertaking to decide a pending GST refund within four weeks and flagged interest liability for prolonged delay under the CGST Act.
The Delhi High Court refused to quash the CBIC circular assigning “proper officer” functions, holding that it was issued with due authority and carries a presumption of validity.
The High Court held that Rule 86A does not permit blocking of input tax credit beyond what is available in the electronic credit ledger. Artificial negative balances were ruled to be without jurisdiction.
Delhi High Court held that refusal to renew passport by the passport authority to the person arrested under GST law is not justifiable since trial court has already granted No Objection Certificate [NOC] to the applicant on bail. Accordingly, concerned passport authorities are directed to renew the passports in accordance with law.
The High Court set aside a GST order after finding that the show cause notice was uploaded only under the Additional Notices Tab, denying the assessee a fair opportunity to respond.
The High Court held that quick repayment alone cannot establish a paper transaction when identity, creditworthiness, and genuineness are proved through records.
The judgment clarified that information under Section 148A means a concise narration of alleged escapement, not complete material. The reassessment proceedings were allowed to continue as no jurisdictional defect was found.
Delhi High Court held that merely because investigator [Enforcement Directorate] doesn t want to arrest the accused, it cannot be said that the accused is entitled to anticipatory bail. Accordingly, anticipatory bail application in cyber fraud dismissed.
The issue was whether ITAT could reject appeals after an administrative transfer. The High Court ruled such dismissals are invalid and appeals must be heard on merits.
Summons under Section 70 of the CGST Act was only a step in the process of inquiry. Mere issuance of summons could not be equated with arrest or initiation of recovery proceedings.
