The issue was whether CBDT monetary limits barred the revenue appeal. The Court held that organised tax evasion and accommodation entry cases are carved out exceptions, defeating the low tax effect argument.
The issue was whether a bank’s empanelled advocate could face criminal trial for an allegedly flawed legal scrutiny report. The High Court held that in the absence of evidence of conspiracy or wrongful gain, prosecution could not continue.
The High Court held that review jurisdiction is limited and cannot be used to re-argue issues already decided. In the absence of an error apparent on record, the review petition was dismissed.
The Tribunal held that purchases supported by invoices, e-way bills, banking payments, and valid GST registration at the time of supply cannot be treated as bogus. Subsequent GST cancellation and non-response by suppliers were held insufficient to justify disallowance.
The Tribunal held that section 269SS targets cash advances in property transactions. Cash received at the time of registration was found to be outside its scope.
The judgment clarified that delayed installment interest arises from a debtor–creditor relationship, not a service supply, and therefore cannot be subjected to GST.
The Court held that rejection of a GST appeal was invalid where prior payments under protest already satisfied the mandatory 10% pre-deposit requirement.
The court held that ITC disclosed in the annual return cannot be rejected solely because it was missed in monthly returns. Appellate authorities must give clear reasons before denying such claims.
The tribunal examined whether reassessment could be initiated by an officer lacking jurisdiction over a non-resident assessee. It held that notices issued by an incorrect authority render the entire reassessment void.
SC upheld the quashing of reassessment where identical foreign investment transactions were examined and accepted in subsequent assessments.
