The Supreme Court permits Flipkart and others to revive GST appeals previously rejected for non-payment from cash ledger, clarifying interim relief and procedural guidelines.
Guwahati High Court ruled that appeals challenging CESTAT’s order on special rate of value addition are not maintainable, as issue pertains to valuation of goods for assessment and lies with Supreme Court.
The Tribunal ruled that loss of sugar due to Cyclone Roanu entitles the SEZ unit to remission of customs duty. Penalties and fines imposed earlier were set aside.
The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal after noting the importer had a valid licence during adjudication. The Court left open the unresolved question of whether Customs can confiscate goods after they exit the port.
CESTAT Mumbai held that confiscation and differential duty based on Air Cargo Complex imports and post parcel valuation were without legal authority. The order imposing penalties and confiscation was set aside.
The Court invalidated the assessment order after finding that it was issued within a week of notice and without meaningful opportunity of hearing.
The Court held that the assessment order was invalid because no hearing date was communicated after 06.11.2023, resulting in an ex-parte order. The matter was remanded for fresh proceedings.
The High Court dismissed the writ petition challenging ITC demands, noting that an alternative statutory remedy under Section 107 of the CGST Act is available and must be pursued.
The Court set aside the penalty imposed for expired e-way bill, holding that proceedings under Section 129 require proof of intent to evade tax, which was absent.
Tribunal quashed penalty where AO’s addition for alleged bogus purchases was purely estimated, emphasizing that penalties require concrete evidence of income concealment.
