The Himachal Pradesh High Court held that a tax deposit made under protest cannot be treated as voluntary payment to conclude proceedings. The matter was remanded for fresh adjudication on merits.
he High Court held that parallel adjudicatory proceedings under GST are barred when one authority has already initiated action on the same subject matter. It directed Central and State authorities to coordinate in line with Supreme Court guidelines to avoid duplication.
The High Court allowed manual filing of GSTR-3B where ITC could not be claimed due to an earlier error. The Court clarified that such filing would not automatically affect the confirmed tax demand.
The High Court set aside blocking of Input Tax Credit where State tax authorities had already initiated proceedings on the same subject matter. The ruling holds that parallel action by central authorities violates Section 6(2)(b) of the CGST Act.
Himachal Pradesh High Court held that since all the ingredients of commission of an offence punishable u/s. 138 of the NI Act were duly satisfied. Thus, Trial Court had rightly convicted the accused of the commission of an offence punishable u/s. 138 of the NI Act. However, sentence is reduced to six months imprisonment.
The High Court stayed reassessment proceedings after noting that the legality of Section 148 notices is under consideration before the Supreme Court. The key takeaway is that proceedings must await the apex court’s final ruling.
The issue involved denial of ITC due to supplier’s non-payment of tax. The Court set aside the demand and ordered fresh adjudication once tax compliance was completed.
The issue was whether Central GST could continue proceedings when State GST had already initiated action on the same issue. The High Court disposed of the petition by directing authorities to follow the Supreme Court’s guidelines to avoid parallel adjudication.
Himachal Pradesh High Court held that bail in scholarship scam case liable to be granted since there is no chance of commencement and conclusion of trial in near further and twin conditions as per section 45 of PMLA satisfied. Accordingly, bail application allowed.
The Court stayed tax action after noting an unusually long delay in issuing the assessment notice, holding that further proceedings should remain in abeyance pending clarification from the authorities.
