E-filing system failure permits exclusion of affected time in insolvency appeals, preventing tribunal technology defects from defeating timely filings...
Pre-existing disputes over outcome-based professional fees can bar Section 9 insolvency proceedings where contractual entitlement requires investigati...
Corresponding scheduled offences preserve money-laundering jurisdiction despite repeal of the central corruption provision where conduct remains cover...
HC noted that the Petitioner had deposited over Rs. 2.01 crores prior to issuance of the SCN for GST registration cancellation, and that this crucial aspect was not properly considered by the adjudicating or appellate authority, indicating a lapse in adjudication. HC observed that, in terms of S.73 CGST Act, penalties on the Petitioner's directors may not be sustainable and the penalty on the Petitioner entity requires reconsideration in light of prior payments. As the GST Appellate Tribunal is now functional, HC directed the Petitioner to file an appeal thereagainst by 25.12.2025, to be heard on merits without dismissal for delay and without any further pre-deposit. Petition disposed.
HC noted that the Petitioner had deposited over Rs. 2.01 crores prior to issuance of the SCN for GST registration cancellation, and that this crucial aspect was not properly considered by the adjudicating or appellate authority, indicating a lapse in adjudication. HC observed that, in terms of S.73 CGST Act, penalties on the Petitioner's directors may not be sustainable and the penalty on the Petitioner entity requires reconsideration in light of prior payments. As the GST Appellate Tribunal is now functional, HC directed the Petitioner to file an appeal thereagainst by 25.12.2025, to be heard on merits without dismissal for delay and without any further pre-deposit. Petition disposed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4891 
