CESTAT held that once Cenvat credit is reversed along with interest, it amounts to non-availment of credit, allowing the assessee to retain the benefit of the abatement notification.
The Tribunal admitted the insolvency petition after determining that the borrower failed to repay outstanding dues despite recall notice and partial payment. A moratorium under Section 14 of the IBC was declared.
The Tribunal held that customs authorities cannot discard the declared export price without valid reasons or evidence. Transaction value supported by invoices and BRC must normally be accepted.
The tribunal ruled that confiscation and penalties were not justified because the Chartered Engineer’s certificate confirmed that the imported goods matched the importer’s declaration.
The Court held that blocking of the Electronic Credit Ledger must automatically cease after one year under Rule 86A(3). Continued restriction beyond the statutory period was declared illegal.
ITAT Hyderabad held that reassessment proceedings were invalid because the notice under Section 148 was issued by the jurisdictional officer rather than through the mandatory faceless system. The assessment order was quashed for lack of jurisdiction.
The Madras High Court held that passing two assessment orders for the same GSTR-2A and GSTR-3B mismatch leads to duplication and double taxation. The earlier order was quashed and the later order was remanded for fresh consideration.
The High Court condoned delay in filing a GST appeal where the taxpayer believed the supplier would rectify an ITC mismatch. The appeal was restored for decision on merits.
The Karnataka High Court held that once cognizance is taken, a private complaint assumes the nature of an FIR and may be referred to by the complainant during testimony. The Court upheld the Magistrate’s decision permitting such reference.
ITAT Delhi held that reassessment proceedings are invalid when notice under Section 148 is issued in the name of a company that had already converted into an LLP. The Tribunal ruled that proceedings against a non-existent entity are void in law.
