Case-law directory
Search and filter tax rulings from the Supreme Court, the High Courts, the GST Appellate Tribunal and the advance-ruling authorities.
97 rulings found
Rajasthan High Court
Where order-in-original was uploaded only on portal and petitioner became aware after recovery from Electronic Credit Ledger, resulting in 125 days delay in filing appeal under Section 107, delay was attributable to circumstances beyond control, so appeal was directed to be entertained and decided on merits if filed within prescribed time after this order
Gauhati High Court
Where assessee challenged Section 73 proceedings alleging non-service of statutory notice for wrongful ITC, but record showed service of a detailed demand- cum-show-cause notice for the relevant period, contention of absence of notice was unfounded and proceeding was not without jurisdiction, with any residual grievances to be adjudicated in statutory appeal. GST: Where assessee challenged unsigned and allegedly defective Form GST DRC- 07 electronic summary regarding period and quantum, such electronic defects alone did not affect jurisdiction of adjudication order, as summary cannot substitute main adjudication, and any inconsistency among notice, order, and summary must be tested on facts and can be redressed through statutory appeal. GST: Where assessee challenged imposition of interest and penalty as exceeding show-cause notice for period July 2017 to March 2018 invoking section 75(7), since determination of whether order exceeded notice required conjoint examination of notice and order, mere assertion did not warrant writ interference and remedy could be pursued before appellate authority. GST: Where assessee alleged denial of hearing during demand adjudication for July 2017 to March 2018 but records showed service of demand-cum-show-cause and no reply from assessee nor any material indicating exclusion from adjudicatory process, non-compliance with Section 75 could be addressed in statutory appeal and no ground for extraordinary interference was established.…
Madras High Court
Where electronic credit ledger was blocked under Rule 86A for alleged wrongful ITC and petitioner filed appeal with pre-deposit from cash ledger, deemed stay operated for recovery of balance, so no appropriation could be made from blocked credit ledger or cash ledger, though blocking under Rule 86A continued and unblocking request required consideration by authorities
Rajasthan High Court
Where petitioner challenged demand for alleged excess ITC and appeal delay resulted from illness of director and order was only uploaded on portal, refusal to condone delay and decide appeal on merits would cause grave prejudice, thus delay was condoned and Appellate Authority was directed to hear appeal on merits if filed within specified period after order upload
Madras High Court
Where assessee’s credit ledger was blocked under rule 86A pending appeal on wrongful ITC availment and statutory pre-deposit was made from electronic cash ledger, blocking under rule 86A remained provisional and capped at one year, deemed stay on recovery operated from appeal filing, prohibiting appropriation but not affecting ongoing blocking, thus unblocking request required consideration within rule 86A framework
Karnataka High Court
Where petitioner filed appeal beyond condonable period due to medical ailments supported by medical certificate and appeal was dismissed as time-barred, delay was satisfactorily explained, rejection order was set aside and appeal was restored for consideration on merits after affording hearing, keeping all contentions open
Supreme Court
Where assessee, having filed a writ petition, sought permission during hearing to withdraw with liberty to pursue statutory appellate remedy before appropriate forum, such withdrawal was permitted, and writ petition was disposed of as withdrawn; SLP challenging impugned order was dismissed, as instant Court found no ground to entertain it, while granting liberty to raise all grounds before GSTAT
Bombay High Court
Where assessee’s refund appeal was dismissed by Appellate Authority solely for non-attendance without addressing merits or providing a speaking order, such non-speaking dismissal violated statutory mandate and principles of natural justice, warranting quashing of impugned order and restoration of appeal for merit-based adjudication
Bombay High Court
Where pre-deposit was made for appeal and First Appellate Authority dropped part of tax demand with no departmental appeal against that portion, petitioner was entitled to proportionate refund of pre-deposit for amount set aside, as insistence on finality for entire proceedings was erroneous and retention of such amount was unauthorized in law
Madras High Court
Where petitioner's electronic credit ledger was blocked under Rule 86A upon finding of bill trading by supplier, and petitioner sought to use blocked ITC for appellate pre-deposit under Section 49(4) read with Section 107, use of credit ledger for pre-deposit is ordinarily permitted but is barred when credit stands blocked, as Section 49(4) does not confer absolute right to such use during blockage
GSTAT Cuttack
Where appellant, a works contractor for Government departments and public authorities, had discharged entire GST liability before initiation of proceedings but demand of interest and penalty was confirmed under section 74 and first appeal was rejected on limitation without examining merits, operation of appellate order and recovery of disputed demand were to be stayed during pendency of section 112 appeal as recovery despite compliance with pre-deposit would defeat appellate remedy and cause irreparable prejudice
Rajasthan High Court
Where statutory GST appeal was dismissed as time barred and delay in filing was due to medical circumstances beyond control, writ jurisdiction could be invoked in such exceptional cases to advance justice, warranting condonation of delay so that appeal could be heard on merits, subject to statutory deposit requirements and late fee payments
Rajasthan High Court
Where petitioner’s statutory appeal delay was due to non-communication by CA not attributable to petitioner, and refusal to consider appeal on merits would cause serious prejudice, delay in filing was condoned and Appellate Authority was directed to hear appeal on merits
Rajasthan High Court
Where SCNs and OIO were only uploaded on portal without effective service or acknowledgment to petitioner, causing delayed appeal filing, limitation period was not triggered and appellate authority's dismissal of appeal as time-barred was unjustified, delay was condoned and appeal restored for decision on merits in line with consistent writ rulings
Rajasthan High Court
Where assessee remained unaware of GST demand order due to it being uploaded only on portal under Additional Notices and Orders and not served manually, and e-filing of appeal stood blocked as time-barred, delay in filing appeal was condoned considering circumstances were beyond assessee's control and Appellate Authority was required to adjudicate appeal on merits
Rajasthan High Court
Where demand was confirmed against assessee and order was uploaded on portal under additional notices and orders tab, and assessee approached instant court with delay of 124 days, having satisfied that delay was due to reasons beyond control of assessee, appellate authority was to be directed to entertain appeal if same was filed within 30 days
Calcutta High Court
Where SCN was uploaded only under Additional Notice and Orders on GST portal without separate intimation and assessee consequently could not respond within prescribed time, dismissal of appeal under section 107 solely on limitation without examining merits was held unsustainable and appellate order was quashed with direction to admit appeal and decide matter on merits after hearing
Rajasthan High Court
Where order was uploaded only on GST portal without any manual service or personal hearing, and assessee became aware of recovery only after bank placed lien, limitation did not begin from portal upload without acknowledgement, so delay in filing appeal was condonable as reasons were beyond assessee's control, and Appellate Authority was to hear appeal on merits
Gujarat High Court
Where refund was rejected, rectification sought within statutory period was disposed by a reasoned order, and appeal was filed against both rejection and rectification, limitation for appeal must be computed from rectification order and not from earlier rejection, thus, appellate authority erred in treating appeal as time- barred based on original order and matter was liable for decision on merits
Delhi High Court
Where directors and managing directors were subjected to penalty under section 122(1) for alleged fraudulent availment and utilization of ITC by their companies, and applicability of section 122(1) to a person who was not a taxable person was pending consideration before Supreme Court, writ petition was not to be entertained as statutory appeal under section 107 was available, thus, petitioners were relegated to appellate remedy