The reassessment was challenged for lacking approval from the correct authority under Section 151 after three years. The Tribunal held that sanction by an incorrect authority vitiates jurisdiction, rendering the reassessment void.
The Court held that petition, ARR processing, and licence fees collected while performing statutory regulatory functions do not constitute taxable supply under GST, leading to quashing of the show cause notice.
The Court will examine whether corporate guarantees issued by a parent company to its subsidiaries amount to a taxable supply under GST, while granting interim protection against coercive action.
The appellate tribunal held that substituting the investigating agency did not amount to a review or recall. Since the original investigation order remained intact, the appeal was dismissed.
The High Court held that a direct appellate challenge to the final removal order was not maintainable. The appeal was withdrawn with liberty to file a fresh writ against the removal order.
Orissa High Court held that legal heir cannot fall within ken of Section 65(7) of the Finance Act, 1994 hence proceedings under section 73 of the Finance Act determining service tax after the death of the service provider is unsustainable in law. Accordingly, the present writ petition is allowed.
The High Court held that a GST adjudication order cannot be based on grounds not mentioned in the show cause notice. Both adjudication and appellate orders were set aside for violating Section 75(7).
The Court ruled that recovery of tax without supplying the assessment order lacks authority of law. Refund with interest was directed unless the order is traced and served by a specified date.
The Tribunal held that Section 87A rebate applies to STCG and LTCG taxed under Sections 111A and 112 when income is within ₹7 lakh. The denial based on system logic and future amendments was rejected.
Delhi High Court held that issues relating to debt and fraud is within the jurisdiction of NCLT to be determined in accordance with IBC. Resultantly, the power of a civil court to entertain the present suit is, therefore, statutorily barred. Accordingly, the plaint is rejected.
