The issue involved challenge to GST notice and order without proper authentication. The court allowed appeal filing with delay condonation and avoided deciding merits.
The issue was delayed appeal due to late awareness of GST liability. The court allowed appeal filing with delay condonation and granted temporary protection from coercive recovery.
The issue was whether two adjudication orders for the same tax period constituted overlapping proceedings under GST law. The court held that proceedings on different issues—short payment vs. excess ITC—do not violate the bar on parallel actions.
The issue was whether a taxpayer could seek revocation after missing the statutory deadline due to non-filing of returns. The court allowed manual filing, holding that authorities should consider such applications on merits despite procedural delay.
The case involved GST cancellation for non-filing of returns during financial hardship post-Covid. The court allowed manual revocation filing, emphasizing relief where delay was unintentional.
The issue was whether an adjudication order ignoring GST already paid under reverse charge could be challenged. The court allowed rectification under Section 161, emphasizing correction of apparent errors.
The issue was whether recovery proceedings should continue during a pending GST dispute. The court granted relief by requiring a 10% deposit and staying coercive action until the Tribunal decides.
The Court held that the issue of treating DRP upload as receipt was already settled by earlier rulings. It dismissed the Revenue’s appeals while making the decision subject to the Supreme Court’s final outcome.
The issue involved challenge to a GST demand order where appeal was delayed. The Court allowed filing of appeal with delay condonation, ensuring the matter can be decided on merits.
The issue was a GST order passed without considering the taxpayer’s reply or giving reasons. The Court allowed filing of appeal with delay condonation and protected the taxpayer from coercive recovery.
