The court held that passing an ex parte GST assessment solely on portal-uploaded notices without granting personal hearing was improper and remanded the matter subject to partial tax payment.
The Court set aside the refund rejection holding that software services exported to a foreign parent cannot be treated as intermediary services. The ruling directs release of the denied GST refund with interest.
The Court held that insolvency proceedings do not entitle an accused to seek records under Section 91 Cr.P.C. during investigation. Documents sought to aid answers are premature and must await the charge sheet.
The Court set aside a GST demand after finding that tax liability was discharged under CGST and SGST instead of IGST. Authorities were directed to reassess liability and grant refund if excess tax was paid.
The court held that a sanctioned rehabilitation scheme directing waiver of dues is binding on customs authorities. As a result, the pre-deposit ordered by the Tribunal was set aside.
The Court found that statutory notices were properly issued but went unanswered by legal heirs. To balance equities, the assessment was quashed and remitted subject to a 20% pre-deposit of disputed tax excluding interest.
The tribunal held that reassessment initiated through a jurisdictional officer instead of the mandatory faceless mechanism was invalid. Notices under Section 148 issued after 01.04.2021 must follow the faceless scheme, failing which the entire assessment collapses.
The tribunal held that dismissal for non-prosecution was invalid where notices were not served on the email ID specified in Form 35. Authorities must strictly follow the communication mode chosen by the taxpayer, failing which proceedings are vitiated.
Delhi High Court held that reference by Council of ICAI for suspension of name of CA from register of Member for period of one year is accepted since professional misconduct of CA i.e. manipulation of public issue and ante-dated stock-investment duly established.
The issue was whether a housing society could intervene in insolvency proceedings. The Court held that societies are distinct juristic entities and lack standing unless recognised as creditors or authorised representatives. The ruling clarifies strict limits on participation at the pre-admission stage.
