The High Court held that inter-State supplies remain taxable under IGST where goods are delivered outside the State. Contractual clauses on transfer of title cannot override Section 10(1)(a) of the IGST Act.
Karnataka High Court held that rejects arbitral award since the HDFC Bank’s claim was barred by limitation. Also held that failure of the Arbitral Tribunal to reject the claim on the said ground, is foundational and vitiates the impugned award by patent illegality on the face of the record.
Karnataka High Court held that order invoking Rule 86A of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules and blocking of Electronic Credit ledger without granting pre-decisional hearing and passing of order without containing independent or cogent reasons is impermissible in law. Accordingly, order quashed.
Karnataka High Court held that non-filling of registration number in Part-B in e-way bill is curable defect and the same would not invalidate or render illegal the e-way bill. Accordingly, levy of penalty u/s. 129 of the KGST Act is not tenable in law.
The High Court held that amended SEZ Rules and a later circular could not be applied retrospectively to confirm GST demand for 2017–18, rendering the order without jurisdiction.
The dispute concerned reversal of ITC based solely on mismatch between GSTR-2A and GSTR-3B. The High Court held that failure to consider the CBIC Circular prescribing the procedure vitiated the order and remitted the matter for fresh adjudication.
The High Court held that denying continuation of registration by relying on an undisclosed investigation report violates natural justice. Since the trust was not given access to the material used against it, the order was set aside and remanded.
The Court held that reassessment initiated outside the statutory framework of Section 151A is invalid. All notices and approvals issued by the jurisdictional officer were quashed, with liberty reserved for revival.
The Court held that confiscation orders passed under GST laws are appealable under Section 107 and should not be challenged directly in writ jurisdiction. As an effective appellate remedy existed, the petition was not maintainable. The ruling reinforces the primacy of statutory remedies in GST disputes.
The Karnataka High Court invalidated a faceless assessment because the show-cause notice gave the assessee less than seven days to respond, violating mandatory SOP and principles of natural justice.
