The Karnataka High Court held that the three-month period for filing a waiver application under Section 128A was directory and not mandatory. The Court quashed rejection of the waiver application that had been dismissed solely on the ground of delay.
The Delhi ITAT deleted addition made under Section 68 on alleged bogus purchases linked to accommodation entry providers. The Tribunal held that purchases and corresponding sales were already recorded in the books, leaving no basis for separate addition under Section 68.
The Court held that an advocate filing GST appeals and adopting a legal interpretation on behalf of a client cannot be prosecuted for conspiracy merely for performing professional duties.
The Tribunal held that reassessment proceedings initiated against a deceased person are void ab initio. Since the department had prior knowledge of the death, failure to issue notice to the legal heir made the assessment invalid.
The Andhra Pradesh High Court quashed assessment orders after finding that the Assessing Officer failed to disclose the basis for fixing a 94.5% oil yield benchmark. The Court held that non-supply of relied-upon material violated principles of natural justice.
The Madhya Pradesh High Court held that a writ petition was not maintainable where the assessee failed to file a timely statutory appeal and did not comply with the mandatory GST pre-deposit requirement. The Court also noted that notices uploaded on the GST portal could not be ignored.
Karnataka High Court held that GST proceedings initiated for FY 2021-22 were without jurisdiction because the Joint Commissioner lacked valid authority to assign proceedings beyond the permitted period.
The Supreme Court refused to interfere with the Delhi High Court order quashing a GST demand passed under Section 73 due to violation of natural justice. The High Court held that granting less than one effective working day to respond to voluminous documents was not a meaningful hearing.
Ahmedabad ITAT held that cost of improvement could not be disallowed solely because suppliers’ VAT registrations were later cancelled retrospectively. The Tribunal remanded the matter for verification of supporting purchase and transportation documents.
The Supreme Court held that n-Hexane could not be classified as motor spirit under Chapter 27 merely because its flash point was below 25°C. The Revenue failed to prove that the imported product was suitable for use in spark ignition engines.
