The Court dismissed the petition as the same bail condition had been previously upheld. The key takeaway is that issues already adjudicated cannot be reopened.
The Court held that electricity duty collected by a licensee is not its own liability but that of consumers. As a result, Section 43B was found inapplicable and the disallowance was rightly deleted.
The court examined whether road tax and penalties could be demanded for issuing an NOC. It held that such charges are not applicable when only an NOC is sought. The key takeaway is that NOC issuance cannot be linked to tax liabilities meant for registration.
The Court held that ignoring the taxpayer’s reply renders the order invalid. It emphasised that adjudication must consider submissions before passing orders.
The issue was whether authorities can block ITC beyond available balance. The Court held that Rule 86A allows restriction only on existing credit and does not permit negative blocking.
The Court quashed the notice as it was based on a factually incorrect audit premise and lacked specific details. It held that vague notices violate natural justice and cannot sustain tax demands.
The Court held that issuing an order before the reply deadline violates natural justice. Even if penalty is paid, authorities must consider objections and pass a reasoned order.
The Court found that the rejection was only a communication and not a legally valid order. It remitted the matter for fresh decision after proper hearing and consideration of all issues.
The Court held that administrative delay in releasing seized jewellery violated CBDT-prescribed timelines. It ruled that increased bank guarantee due to rising gold prices cannot be imposed on the taxpayer.
The High Court held that interest under Section 234B must be waived where conflicting judicial decisions created uncertainty regarding tax exemption. The rejection of the waiver application was set aside.
