The High Court quashed an Order-in-Original after finding that the petitioner alleged lack of notice and denial of hearing. It restored the proceedings for fresh consideration on merits.
The Karnataka High Court quashed an assessment order after finding that allegations concerning 119 apartment sales were introduced without prior notice during Section 148A proceedings. The Court granted the taxpayer an opportunity to submit a detailed response before fresh consideration.
The Karnataka High Court quashed a service tax order passed under the Finance Act, 1994 after finding that the petitioner alleged lack of notice and denial of an opportunity to respond. The matter was remitted for fresh adjudication on merits.
The Karnataka High Court set aside a GST adjudication order after finding that the authority incorrectly stated that no reply had been filed. The Court held that ignoring the taxpayer’s submissions violated principles of natural justice.
The Karnataka High Court restored GST registration cancelled for non-filing of returns, despite the appeal being dismissed on limitation grounds. The Court held that restoration could be granted where the taxpayer is willing to file pending returns and pay taxes, interest, and penalty.
The High Court held that reassessment notices issued physically by jurisdictional officers instead of faceless authorities violate Section 151A. The ruling sets aside non-compliant notices while tying the final outcome to pending Supreme Court decisions.
The Karnataka High Court ruled that ITC for FY 2018-19 cannot be denied merely because import and SEZ transactions were absent from GSTR-2A. The Court held that GSTR-2A did not capture such data during the relevant period, making the demand unsustainable.
The High Court held that healthcare services remain exempt even when delivered through another hospital under a revenue-sharing arrangement. Classification must follow the true nature of the supply rather than the contractual structure.
The High Court set aside the Order-in-Original after noting the petitioner’s grievance that submitted documents were not considered due to formatting issues. The matter was remanded for fresh adjudication with an opportunity to present all records.
The High Court held that issuing a demand notice along with a draft assessment order violated the mandatory procedure under Section 144C. Since the assessment had effectively been completed at the draft stage, the reassessment orders were quashed.
