The Court held that Section 270A cannot be invoked when assessed income matches the returned income, and an excessive FTC claim alone does not constitute under-reporting. Key takeaway: Penalty requires statutory pre-conditions to be satisfied, not mere disagreement on a claim.
Karnataka High Court held that mere non-production of the Bank Realization Certificates (eBRCs) / Foreign Inward Remittance Certificate (FIRCs) cannot be reason for rejection of refund claim specially as all the details in this regard are made available to the department.
The Court held that vehicles were detained and penalty collected without any seizure or adjudication order. It directed refund and allowed authorities to issue a proper show cause notice.
The Court held that the petitioner challenged a 7A order without first using the statutory appeal under Section 7-I. The writ was dismissed as Article 226 cannot be invoked to circumvent prescribed remedies.
The Karnataka High Court set aside a GST demand order after notices were sent to the petitioner’s email Junk Folder, preventing awareness and response. The matter is remitted for fresh adjudication, ensuring the petitioner can submit replies and be heard.
The Court remanded an ex-parte GST demand order after the petitioner could not respond due to a parent’s serious illness. This case underlines that unavoidable circumstances can merit reconsideration of tax proceedings.
Karnataka High Court held that blocking of Electronic Credit Ledger invoking rule 86A of Central Goods and Services Tax Rules [CGST Rules] without granting pre-decisional hearing and without providing reasons to believe is impermissible. Accordingly, order is quashed.
Karnataka High Court held that blocking of Electronic Credit Ledger by invoking provisions of Rule 86A of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017 [CGST Rules] is illegal and arbitrary since reasons to believe was not provided which is mandatory requirement for invoking Rule 86A.
The Court set aside the show cause notice, Order-in-Original, and Order-in-Appeal after holding that the assessee must be given an opportunity to file a fresh reply. The matter was remitted for reconsideration from the SCN-reply stage.
Karnataka High Court allowed a 36-day delay in filing income tax returns, citing system failure and unavoidable circumstances as sufficient cause for condonation under Section 119(2)(b).
