The Tribunal held that Section 56(2)(viib) could not be applied once the assessee qualified as a company in which the public are substantially interested. The ruling clarifies that the charging provision itself fails where statutory exclusion applies.
The High Court held that proceedings under Section 153C cannot stand where the satisfaction note lacks a date and is communicated after an unexplained two-year delay. Strict compliance with statutory requirements was reaffirmed.
The Delhi High Court declined to rule on the validity of GST limitation-extension notifications as the issue is pending before the Supreme Court. The taxpayer was directed to pursue the statutory appellate remedy, with protection against limitation.
The Court dealt with a challenge to a confiscation show cause notice where jurisdictional confusion delayed proceedings. It directed a time-bound reply, personal hearing, and adjudication while leaving merits open.
The Court examined whether the stringent twin conditions for bail under the PMLA applied to a woman accused in a money laundering case. Holding that the statutory proviso applied, the Court granted bail, emphasizing delayed proceedings and completed investigation.
The High Court stayed GST recovery proceedings after finding that the audit report triggering the demand was issued by an officer lacking statutory authority, indicating a prima facie jurisdictional defect.
The appellate tribunal held that a date discrepancy in the possession notice was a harmless typographical error. It ruled that SARFAESI procedures were substantially complied with and restored the bank’s recovery action.
The addition for alleged cash paid towards property purchase was deleted as the transaction itself stood cancelled. The ruling confirms that cancelled transactions weaken unexplained cash allegations.
The Tribunal ruled that reassessment actions taken by the faceless assessment centre before the notified date were without authority. The final assessment order was therefore held invalid.
The High Court ruled that GST demands including periods before resolution plan approval are legally unsustainable and must be quashed.
