The Court directed time-bound action for implementing an appellate order granting TDS relief. It held that refunds due after success in appeal must not be unnecessarily delayed.
The Court declined to entertain the writ petition, noting that the appellate tribunal was accepting filings and the impugned order was appealable. It held that alternate remedies cannot be bypassed merely due to delay concerns.
The High Court granted bail in a ₹35 crore GST evasion case, noting the petitioner’s voluntary deposit of ₹1.25 crore and medical grounds, subject to strict conditions.
The High Court ruled that when the initial pre-deposit exceeds 20% of the revised tax demand, no additional payment can be insisted upon for filing appeal before GSTAT.
The High Court declined to entertain a writ challenging GST on mining royalty, holding that an effective appellate remedy was available. The petitioner was directed to pursue the statutory appeal.
The High Court held that contradictory portal communications and missing rejection orders cannot defeat a refund claim. The original refund application was ordered to be honoured with interest.
The Court set aside the appellate order and remanded the matter after noting the statutory amendment allowing ITC for earlier years. The authority must reconsider the case in light of Section 16(5) and CBIC clarification.
The High Court held that refund claims cannot be rejected based on a time limit prescribed only in rules. The ruling restores refunds where the parent statute provides no limitation.
Jharkhand High Court held that levy of electricity duty on the basis of ‘net charges’ as introduced by the 1st Amendment Act, 2021 is ultra vires to the Bihar Electricity Duty Act, 1948. Accordingly, 1st Amendment Act, 2021 and the Rules, 2021 are declared ultra vires to the Act, 1948.
The Court quashed a GST refund rejection passed without granting the full statutory reply period and personal hearing. It held that non-compliance with Rule 92 vitiates the refund order.
