The Madras High Court upheld the GST demand for reversal of input tax credit, citing supplier non-payment. The petitioner may still appeal with a 50% deposit within 30 days.
The Tribunal dismissed the income tax appeal after the assessee formally requested withdrawal. The ruling confirms that appeals may be closed when the assessee opts not to pursue them.
The High Court held that the petitioner must deposit tax and related amounts under Section 112(8) before filing an appeal to the GSTAT, emphasizing writ jurisdiction cannot substitute statutory appellate remedies.
The High Court set aside the rejection of a GST appeal filed beyond the statutory period, directing the appellate authority to treat the later appeal as non est while the earlier pending appeal proceeds on merits.
The Court held that Customs cannot obtain waivers of SCN or personal hearing during goods appraisement and found pre-printed waiver forms invalid. It directed issuance of a proper hearing and emphasised mandatory communication through email and mobile.
The court ordered the release of gold jewellery seized at IGI Airport, ruling that the items were brand new and imposed costs for misrepresenting them as old.
The applicant requested withdrawal of an advance ruling on Red Seaweed Calcium classification before issuance, and CAAR approved the withdrawal under Regulation 20.
The ITAT held that a penalty under section 271(1)(c) cannot survive once the underlying quantum addition is deleted by a binding ITAT order. The Revenue’s appeal was dismissed as no stay or direction from the High Court could revive the deleted quantum.
ITAT rules that reliance on remand report from a different year is invalid, restoring matter to Assessing Officer for AY 2012-13.
The Court held that Section 270A cannot be invoked when assessed income matches the returned income, and an excessive FTC claim alone does not constitute under-reporting. Key takeaway: Penalty requires statutory pre-conditions to be satisfied, not mere disagreement on a claim.
