The Tribunal held that the lower authorities misread the amended notification on Chapter 31 goods and failed to show that the imports were clearly excluded. The matter was remanded for fresh examination of the exemption’s scope.
The Court ruled that assessment notices for earlier years were void because the tax authorities did not lodge claims before the resolution plan was approved. Once the plan attained finality, all excluded claims stood extinguished under binding IBC principles. The judgment also holds that the revenue cannot deny carry-forward of losses after failing to participate in the insolvency process.
The Court ruled that the petitioner offered no justification for challenging a February 2023 inspection through a writ filed only in August 2025. It noted that factual disputes and the availability of an appeal remedy made the writ non-maintainable. However, the petitioner was permitted to approach the appellate authority within 30 days.
SC disposes of Revenue SLPs; TOLA applies but reassessment timelines remain strictly enforced.
The High Court set aside a GST demand after finding the confirmed amount exceeded the sum proposed in the show-cause notice, holding the order violative of Section 75(7). The matter was remitted for fresh consideration.
The High Court held that a penalty exceeding the amount proposed in the show cause notice violated statutory limits, setting aside the penalty order and remitting the matter for fresh consideration.
The Tribunal held that penalty under section 270A could not stand because the JPACK ledger titled “SABARI” was not proven to belong to the assessee. The ruling emphasises lack of corroborative evidence and inconsistencies in the seized material.
The Tribunal held that full TDS credit must be granted since all income relating to the TDS deductions had already been taxed. Proportionate credit under Section 199 was found unjustified.
The Court held that the approval granted for multiple search assessments was issued in a consolidated, mechanical form without case-specific consideration. It noted that Section 153D requires meaningful application of mind, which was absent in the approval examined by the Tribunal. The appeals were dismissed as no substantial question of law arose.
Allahabad HC directs authorities to issue Form GST MOV-09 after payment under protest. Non-issuance deprived the petitioner of the right to appeal, making the action unlawful.
