Delhi High Court held that exemption from Basic Customs Duty [BCD] admissible in case of WAPs import employing either Multiple Input/ Multiple Output (MIMO) or Long Term Evolution (LTE) standards prior to amendment brought vide Finance Act, 2021.
Delhi High Court held that writ jurisdiction not entertained as the case involved fraudulent availment of Input Tax Credit under GST. Accordingly, petition dismissed and petitioner permitted to file an appeal before appellate authority.
Delhi High Court held that any award passed by an arbitrator unilaterally appointed by an interested party is vitiated. Accordingly, ex-parte arbitral award passed is liable to be set aside.
The Delhi High Court allowed a petition in Aashna Singhal vs. Principal Commissioner of GST, ruling that a provisional attachment of a bank account ceased to be valid after one year as per Section 83(2) of the GST Act.
Delhi High Court ruled that a penalty under Section 271E was time-barred, clarifying that limitation period begins with Assessing Officer’s initiation.
Delhi High Court held that when the transaction is one of trading in land and no specific remuneration is fixed in the deal for acquisition of land, the same would not be liable to service tax. Accordingly, appeal of revenue dismissed.
Delhi High Court held that strict application of rigours of Section 37 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 [NDPS Act] not justified since quantity of Ganja recovered is marginally above threshold of commercial quantity under NDPS Act. Accordingly, bail application allowed.
Delhi High Court held that writ involving matter of availment of fraudulent Input Tax Credit [ITC] under GST not entertained since due to availability of appellate remedy as the matter involves several factual issues and the concept of ITC by itself involves a series of transactions.
The Delhi High Court ruled that Xilinx India Technology Services Pvt. Ltd. is entitled to interest on its delayed GST refund under Section 56 of the CGST Act affirming that interest is automatically payable without a separate claim if the refund is not processed within 60 days.
A waiver of the Show Cause Notice could not be done on the basis of a pre filled form and the same being used as a basis for not issuing a Show Cause Notice or not affording a personal hearing, was not permissible.
