The Jharkhand High Court granted bail in an alleged fake GST ITC case after considering that the petitioner had remained in custody for more than four months. The Court imposed conditions requiring cooperation with the trial and non-interference with witnesses.
Since the material on record disclosed grave suspicion regarding acquisition and possession of assets disproportionate to known sources of income and attracted the presumption under section 24 of the PMLA, the Special Court was justified in refusing discharge. Accordingly, the criminal revision petition of a former Forest Range Officer was dismissed.
The Jharkhand High Court directed the authority to implement the CESTAT order and determine whether a refund with interest or tax with interest was payable. The exercise must be completed within three months after hearing the petitioner, if necessary.
The Court held that the dispute involved a pure legal question regarding composite versus mixed supply. Finding a prima facie jurisdictional issue, it ruled that the writ petition was maintainable.
The High Court held that disputes involving factual examination and merits under Section 74 of the CGST Act must ordinarily be pursued through statutory appeals. It ruled that neither lack of jurisdiction nor violation of natural justice was established to justify bypassing alternate remedies.
The Jharkhand High Court held that retrospective insertion of Section 147A removed the jurisdictional challenge against reassessment notices issued under Sections 148 and 148A. The petition was disposed of without quashing the proceedings.
High Court held that GST authorities must consider CBIC circular clarifying implementation of Section 16(5) before sustaining denial of input tax credit for delayed return filing.
The Jharkhand High Court held that a taxpayer cannot bypass the statutory appellate mechanism merely by alleging non-service of notices. The Court dismissed the writ petition while granting liberty to file an appeal under the GST law.
The Court clarified that local self-government bodies are not automatically exempt from GST on all activities. It ruled that such claims require factual scrutiny and cannot bypass the statutory appellate mechanism.
The issue involved alleged cyber fraud where funds were credited to the petitioner’s account. The Court granted relief considering absence of criminal history and willingness to return the money.
