The High Court ruled that rejecting condonation requests through mere communication without a speaking order is invalid. Authorities must pass reasoned decisions after proper consideration.
The issue concerns whether startups can sell regulated products without BIS certification. It is established that certification is mandatory under QCOs, and non-compliance can lead to penalties, bans, or closure.
The Tribunal held that the extended limitation period cannot be invoked without proving intent to evade tax. Since no fraud, suppression, or wilful misstatement was established, the demand was time-barred. The key takeaway is that limitation cannot be stretched merely due to audit findings.
The Court found that tax already paid cannot be demanded again through adjudication proceedings. It allowed the taxpayer to seek rectification with proof of payment.
The Court allowed the taxpayer to seek revocation even after expiry of the statutory timeline. It directed authorities to consider delay condonation and decide the matter on merits.
The Court held that tax authorities cannot coerce payment when no demand has been raised. It directed cooperation in investigation while protecting the taxpayer from undue pressure.
Supreme Court held that post repeal of SICA and non-invocation of IBC, Gannon Dunkerley & Co. Ltd. (GDCL) didn’t possess ownership rights to sell assets of Jaipur Udyog Ltd (JUL). Further, Court directed to verify and make payment of long-standing dues of workers of JUL.
The issue was whether a GST order passed without considering reply should be set aside in writ. The Court allowed the petitioner to file an appeal with delay condonation, leaving merits open.
The issue was whether a delayed writ against a GST order should be entertained. The Court declined to examine merits and allowed filing of appeal with delay condonation.
The issue was whether relief could be granted against a GST assessment order through writ. The Court allowed the petitioner to file an appeal with delay condonation, leaving merits open.
