Lawgics – Judgment No. 165
Section 35(3) prohibits proceedings under Section 130 for alleged excess stock found during the survey. Proceedings should have been initiated under Section 73 & 74 for excess stock.
Stay updated
Section 35(3) prohibits proceedings under Section 130 for alleged excess stock found during the survey. Proceedings should have been initiated under Section 73 & 74 for excess stock.
GST Assessment order was set aside as the CGST Act’s assessment time limit was extended for F.Y. 2018-19, but no similar extension was made under the DGST Act.
GST Cancellation order was set aside as it affected assessee’s valuable rights and lacked reasoning.
Revisionary order passed for recovery of erroneous grant of refund was set as Supreme Court’s extension of limitation periods due to COVID-19 and GST Council’s recommendations applied to the petitioner’s refund claim.
Synopsis: Petitioner should seek remedy through the appropriate statutory process after the competent authority makes a decision and passes an order.
Procedural delays do not hinder justice, especially when the petitioner has made bona-fide efforts to comply with appeal requirements, then delay in filing appeal ought to be condoned.
Once an amalgamating entity ceases to exist upon an approved Scheme of Amalgamation, the Revenue cannot issue SCNs in the name of the transferor company.
Cancellation of GST registration is not contingent upon tax liability.
Procedural mistakes in transitioning ITC should not lead to denial of credit if substantive entitlement is proven, when petitioner had reflected ITC in monthly GSTR-3B returns & utilized this credit to discharge tax liability under GST Act, instead of filing TRANS-01.
Any communication without a DIN is deemed invalid and considered as never issued as per Circular No. 122/41/2019-GST dated 05.11.2019