GST Law Does Not Mandate Three-Month Gap Between Notice And Adjudication Order: Madras High Court

The Madras High Court on 17 July held that GST law does not require a mandatory three-month gap between issuance of a show cause notice and passing of an adjudication order, clarifying that the three-month requirement only applies to the period between issuance of the notice and expiry of the statutory limitation period for passing the order. Justice Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy partly allowed writ petitions filed by Raj Machine Tools challenging two GST assessment orders for the financial year...

Settled Disputes Cannot Be Revived Without Express Reservation Of Future Claims: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court on 23 July held that parties cannot reopen issues settled through a settlement agreement after acting upon the settlement without reserving any future claims, as such a course would undermine certainty, consistency and finality in disputes. Justice Tushar Rao Gedela upheld an arbitral award granting Atlanta Infra Assets Limited a 53-day extension of the concession period for the Nagpur-Kondhali section of National Highway-6 in Maharashtra, including an additional 28 days...

SEBI Reference Alone Does Not Make Writ Petition Against Stock Broker Maintainable: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court on 22 July held that merely marking a representation or complaint to the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) does not make a writ petition maintainable when the dispute is essentially between an investor and a private stock broker and alternative statutory remedies are available. A Single Bench of Dr. Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma dismissed a petition filed by Sushil Kumar Verma against SEBI and Indiabulls Securities Limited, holding that the petitioner had...

Patna High Court Quashes Mechanical GST Registration Cancellation, Imposes ₹15,000 Costs On Department

The Patna High Court on 17 July held that GST authorities cannot cancel GST registration or reject a revocation application without complying with the statutory safeguards mandated under law, ruling that orders passed mechanically in violation of the principles of natural justice are unsustainable. A Division Bench of Justices Rajeev Ranjan Prasad and Sunil Dutta Mishra allowed the writ petition filed by Munna Chaudhary, set aside the GST registration cancellation order, the order rejecting the...

Arbitration Initiated by Liquidator Without Prior NCLT Approval Isn't Void: Bombay High Court

The court ruled that an arbitration notice issued by a liquidator before obtaining NCLT approval became effective only after permission was granted

Karnataka High Court Strikes Down Health Security Se National Security Cess Act On Pan Masala Manufacturers

While holding that Parliament was competent to enact the law, the court ruled that a cess based on production capacity instead of actual manufacture is unconstitutional.

Revenue Cannot Appeal Assessment Order Under Income Tax Act, Can Only Seek Revision: Allahabad High Court

The Allahabad High Court has recently held that under the Income Tax Act, 1961, the revenue has no right of appeal against an assessment order, as the assessment order is the stated case of the revenue itself. It held that where the revenue is aggrieved by an assessment order, its remedy is to seek revision where the assessment order is found to be "erroneous in so far as it is prejudicial to the interest of revenue." The court held that in an assessment proceeding the Assessing Authority...

FSSAI Alone Can Certify Imported Food Safety; Customs Can Sample For Classification: Calcutta High Court

The Calcutta High Court has held that only an authorised officer of the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI) is competent to draw samples of imported food products to determine whether they are safe and fit for human consumption. It clarified that Customs authorities may independently draw samples only for customs purposes such as classification, valuation, duty liability and investigation of possible misdeclaration. Justice Smita Das De held, "In concise, the FSSAI Authorised...

NFAC Must Provide Video Conferencing If Assessee Seeks Personal Hearing: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court has held that a taxpayer who seeks a personal hearing during appellate proceedings before the NFAC is entitled to such a virtual hearing.“There are various issues which can be better explained with the help of personal or virtual assistance by assessee or its authorised representative. Mere written submissions or memo of appeal are not sufficient for proper adjudication,” division bench of Justices Dinesh Mehta and Rajneesh Kumar Gupta observed.The court thus set aside an...

Delhi High Court Restrains 14 More Websites From Using 'BETWAY' Trademark

The Delhi High Court has recently restrained 14 more websites from using the trademark "BETWAY" or any deceptively similar mark in a trademark infringement suit filed by Merryvale Limited, the proprietor of the registered BETWAY trademark.BETWAY is an online sports betting and gaming brand owned by Merryvale Limited.The latest order extends interim protection granted earlier against similar allegedly infringing websites. Justice Jyoti Singh held that Merryvale had established a prima facie case...

Assessing Officer Not Deemed to Have Noticed Facts Disclosed in Wealth Tax Return: Gujarat High Court

The Gujarat High Court has recently held that an Assessing Officer is not deemed to have noticed facts disclosed in a wealth tax return while examining an income tax return. It refused to interfere with reassessment proceedings initiated against a Hindu Undivided Family (HUF) over an unexplained cash payment of more than ₹1.02 crore towards the purchase of immovable property. A Division Bench of Justice A.S. Supehia and Justice Vaibhavi D. Nanavati dismissed the writ petition filed by...

Report Of Expert Board Constituted By Consent Cannot Be Executed As Arbitral Award: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court has held that an expert board constituted through consent orders to determine service charges cannot be treated as an arbitral tribunal merely because the parties agreed to its constitution. It ruled that the Board's report, which contained recommendations, could not be treated as an arbitral award, decree or any other executable instrument. Justice Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar dismissed an execution petition filed by the South Delhi Municipal Corporation (SDMC), which...