The petitioner argued that the GST notice was issued by an officer lacking lawful authority, but the Rajasthan High Court held that such issues should first be agitated through the statutory appellate remedy.
The Court disposed of the petition after finding that assessment proceedings against legal representatives require mandatory compliance with Section 75. It reiterated that absence of personal hearing vitiates orders passed against heirs of a deceased assessee.
The Rajasthan High Court upheld CAT Jaipur’s order granting stepping up of pay to senior employees after noting that similar issues had already been decided by the Karnataka and Delhi High Courts. The court found no reason to interfere with the Tribunal’s directions.
The Rajasthan High Court held that refusal to hear the appeal on merits would cause grave prejudice where cancellation of GST registration impacted business continuity and livelihood. The Court exercised writ jurisdiction to condone the delay.
Court ruled that reassessment notices under Section 148 must be issued through the faceless mechanism under Section 151A and the 2022 Scheme. Notice issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer was held invalid and quashed.
The Rajasthan High Court held that the benefit of Section 115BAA could not be denied when Form 10-IC was filed within the period permitted under CBDT Circulars. The Court ruled that procedural delay could not defeat a clearly exercised tax option.
The Rajasthan High Court refused bail in a case involving alleged large-scale GST evasion through fake firms, bogus invoices, and fraudulent e-way bills. The Court held that serious economic offences involving deep-rooted conspiracies require a stricter approach in bail matters.
The Rajasthan High Court held that GST authorities cannot reopen issues already adjudicated by the Authority for Advance Ruling without fresh material or change in facts. The Court quashed show cause notices alleging misclassification of tobacco products under Section 74 of the CGST Act.
The case involved refusal to entertain a delayed GST appeal due to limitation. The Court followed its earlier ruling and directed authorities to hear the appeal on merits subject to statutory deposits.
The case involved delay in filing GST appeal due to death of a key partner managing operations. The Court held that such circumstances constitute sufficient cause and directed the appeal to be heard on merits after statutory compliance.
