The Court held that payments cannot be denied credit merely because they were recorded under different accounting heads. It ruled that substantive relief under the Sabka Vishwas Scheme must prevail over technical classifications.
The case addressed whether stock discrepancies could be attributed to a sister concern. The Court held that absence of supporting evidence justified the VAT demand and confirmed the assessment.
The case addressed whether a 247-day delay in filing an appeal could be condoned due to pandemic-related disruptions. The Court condoned the delay citing exceptional circumstances and directed adjudication on merits.
The issue involved rejection of an appeal against GST cancellation on limitation grounds. The Court granted relief by following consistent precedents, allowing restoration subject to compliance conditions.
The Court held that failure to consider a filed reply invalidates the assessment. The matter was remitted for fresh adjudication with hearing opportunity.
The court held that the impugned GST notifications were invalid as they curtailed limitation and were based on erroneous legal assumptions. The ruling clarifies that such arbitrary notifications cannot override statutory provisions.
The court held that passing an assessment order without granting personal hearing violates principles of natural justice. It set aside the order and remanded the matter for fresh consideration.
The issue was whether LIC premium payments for post-retirement annuity were contingent liabilities. The Court held they represented an existing liability and allowed the deduction as a business expense.
The court held that recovery proceedings cannot continue without considering the taxpayer’s objections. Authorities must decide representations before enforcing attachment.
The case involved denial of remaining depreciation where machinery was used for a short period. The Court held that balance depreciation can be claimed in the subsequent year to ensure parity.
