The issue was whether indirect export through intermediaries qualifies for exemption. The Supreme Court upheld denial, ruling that direct export is required for excise benefit.
The issue was whether GST show cause notices can cover multiple financial years in one proceeding. The Court held that Sections 73 and 74 permit consolidation using the phrase for any period, and declined interference.
The issue was whether reassessment was valid without proper service of mandatory notice under Section 143(2). The Tribunal remanded the case for fresh examination, holding that the jurisdictional issue requires reconsideration.
The issue was whether the service provider was liable to pay service tax on manpower services. The Tribunal held that liability rests with the recipient under reverse charge, making the demand unsustainable.
The tribunal held that government support includes capital grants, land, and infrastructure, not just recurring funding. This broader interpretation justified exemption eligibility.
The issue was whether delay in filing appeals could be condoned. The Court held that lack of sufficient cause and negligence justified rejection of the delay application.
The tribunal examined whether surcharge applies to private discretionary trusts taxed at maximum marginal rate. It held that surcharge is not applicable where income is below ₹50 lakh, as per Finance Act thresholds.
The issue was whether services related to road construction for government bodies are taxable. The Tribunal held that such services are exempt, making the demand unsustainable.
The Authority held that procedural questions on E-way bill generation are not covered under Section 97(2) of the CGST Act. The application was rejected as not maintainable.
The issue was whether a digital transport platform qualifies as a GTA. The Authority held that absence of consignment note and transport activity excludes GTA classification. It ruled that such platforms are e-commerce operators liable for GST on commission and TCS compliance.
