The Court held that a CGST assessment order must be challenged through statutory appeal, not writ jurisdiction. It clarified that alternate remedies must be exhausted before approaching the High Court.
The case deals with rejection of a delayed tax appeal due to insufficient explanation. The Court upheld the defect but allowed another opportunity to justify the delay and pursue the appeal.
The Court set aside the IGST demand on re-imported goods, holding that liability depends on whether input tax credit was availed. It directed the petitioner to furnish a certificate and allowed fresh adjudication.
The ruling requires authorities to hear and decide delay and stay petitions promptly while suspending recovery proceedings. It highlights procedural fairness in tax disputes.
The Court held that issues relating to reliance on a third-party statement are factual matters. It declined to entertain the writ petition and directed the petitioner to avail statutory remedies.
The Court held that a single show cause notice covering multiple assessment years is not legally sustainable. Authorities were permitted to issue separate notices for each year.
The court examined whether unutilized cess credits could be refunded after GST transition. It held that without explicit statutory backing, refund claims are not maintainable, leading to dismissal of the petition.
The Court examined whether tax authorities can issue a single order for multiple years. It held that composite orders are invalid and directed separate orders for each year.
The petitioner alleged denial of hearing and cross-examination. The Court ruled that no such violation was established at this stage and deferred such issues to appropriate proceedings.
Kerala High Court set aside ITAT orders as mechanical and non-speaking, holding that the Tribunal failed to independently analyze facts, consider submissions, and provide reasoned findings; matter remanded for fresh adjudication.
