The Court held that penalty proceedings under the KGST Act cannot be initiated after an unreasonable delay. Even without a statutory limitation period, action must be taken within a reasonable timeframe.
The Court held that SIM cards, recharge coupons, and value-added telecom services are not “goods” under the KVAT Act. VAT demands on such receipts were therefore set aside.
The court examined whether earlier liquidation orders could be recalled in light of a sanctioned revival proposal. It held that recall was justified after the holding company undertook full liability and the Government raised no objection.
The Court examined whether an order rejecting a resolution plan could be appealed under the IBC. It held that appeals lie against both approval and rejection orders, directing parties to approach NCLAT instead of invoking writ jurisdiction.
The Court held that a private commercial bank is not amenable to writ jurisdiction under Article 226. The key takeaway is that disputes with private banks must be pursued before appropriate alternative forums.
The issue was whether employees are protected when TDS is deducted but not remitted. The Court held tax remains payable as no credit arises without deposit.
The writ was filed long after appellate orders were passed and without approaching ITAT. The Court held that delay and failure to exhaust statutory remedies disentitled the assessee from writ relief.
Kerala High Court held that levy of penalty on the basis of statement recorded under section 108 of the Customs Act is not sustainable since provisions of section 138B have not been complied with. Accordingly, the appeals are allowed.
Kerala High Court held that the omission of sub-clause (j) to Section 66D of the Finance Act and, resultantly, imposition of service tax on ‘access to amusement facilities’ is unconstitutional. Accordingly, order set aside and appeal allowed.
The court closed the writ after the State clarified that recovery proceedings were initiated only against the assessee husband. The petitioner was granted liberty to re-approach the court if her property is targeted.
