Imported educational software supplied on CDs to educational institutions was treated as packaged, rather than customized, software where identical unmodifiable products were marketed to varied users and related consultation, installation, training and support did not alter the software. MRP/RSP-based valuation applied because packages lacked the mandatory "not for retail sale" declaration required for the industrial or institutional consumer exclusion. Customer and sub-reseller invoices supported the retail sale price; installation, training and support costs were not deductible without a separate invoice break-up. Non-declaration of MRP supported extended limitation, confiscation and penalties, sustained alongside differential CVD.

Customs valuation requires disclosure of the grounds for doubting the truth or accuracy of the declared transaction value, followed by sequential application of the valuation rules. NIDB data or routinely adopted rates cannot support value enhancement unless the relevant Bills of Entry, declared values, and comparability of goods by country of origin, commercial level and quantity are established. Enhancement founded solely on undisclosed routine rates is unsustainable. For alleged misdeclaration, examination differences that may be commercially addressed under a supply agreement do not establish fraud, suppression or wilful misstatement without supporting evidence. In those circumstances, confiscation, redemption fine and penalties are not justified.

Transferable Duty-Free Import Authorisations may cover Inshell Walnuts under generic SION input descriptions even where the goods' commercial description is not expressly named. Where a SION permits generic or alternative inputs, the specific input and quantity declared in export documents must correspond with the authorisation. Eligibility for customs-duty exemption depends on endorsement of the relevant input, prescribed quantity and value, validity, and compliance with DFIA and exemption-notification conditions. Technical correlation is confined to identified sensitive inputs. Percentage-based CIF value caps and actual user conditions based only on a Public Notice cannot independently curtail substantive DFIA entitlement or deny exemption; such restrictions require imposition through the legally required notification.

Rectification or modification of an advance ruling cannot reopen its merits or waive an express condition of a customs exemption. Exemption for imported goods repaired or refurbished and re-exported remains subject to Notification No. 134/94-Cus, including performance of prescribed operations under Section 65 of the Customs Act, 1962. A DTA unit's operational difficulty in not operating under the MOOWR scheme does not constitute a mistake apparent from the record or a legal or factual error. Alternative safeguards, conditions under other notifications, and proposed traceability measures cannot replace the governing notification's express requirement. The request to dispense with that condition was rejected, leaving the ruling operative subject to all notification conditions.

Committee of Creditors-approved resolution plans bind the Committee and the successful resolution applicant even before approval by the Adjudicating Authority. The withdrawal mechanism does not permit withdrawal of the insolvency application or the approved plan after Committee approval and submission for approval. The Committee cannot withdraw approval, initiate a fresh resolution process, or take decisions affecting the pending plan. The Adjudicating Authority must decide pending approval applications against statutory requirements, considering the corporate debtor's current financial position and cash balance; improved profitability alone does not justify refusing approval where those requirements are met.

Settlement agreements and agreements to sell must be read together to determine whether an admitted operational debt has been discharged or merely secured. Where payment of outstanding dues remains an option that cancels the proposed sale, and no consideration or possession has passed, the debt retains its operational character. A property-related specific-performance dispute does not constitute a pre-existing dispute over supplied goods where liability is acknowledged and no quality or quantity objection is documented. Novation requires a mutually agreed replacement or extinction of the original obligation; contingent sale terms that preserve payment liability do not satisfy that requirement.

Money-laundering jurisdiction under the PMLA depends on a registered and subsisting scheduled offence, because proceeds of crime require the existence of that predicate offence. An ECIR founded solely on an FIR cannot continue once that FIR is quashed; it cannot be sustained on an assumed criminal activity or the possible involvement of other persons or entities. The ECIR was therefore quashed only insofar as it concerned the petitioners, reflecting the scope of the relief sought.

Bail in a money-laundering prosecution involving alleged diversion of allottees' funds was refused. An independent audit report was treated as establishing the alleged diversion, while repeated absence of the applicant's counsel, recorded in the status report, was treated as contributing to trial delay. Expeditious disposal was directed without unnecessary adjournments, subject to legal impediments.

Section 142(5) of the CGST Act governs post-GST refund claims for service tax paid under the existing law where the service was not provided. Such claims are to be disposed of under the existing law, with any refundable amount paid in cash subject to unjust enrichment. For a claim arising from cancellation of a flat booking, the relevant-date limitation was treated as inapplicable, so the date of cancellation versus the date of tax payment did not determine entitlement. The time-bar rejection was set aside, and refund with applicable interest was directed within two months.

Equitable settlement of assigned debt resolved the assignee's claim through payment of an additional Rs. 125 crores within twelve weeks, beyond sums already paid. On payment, securities and guarantees must be released, and pending debt-recovery and insolvency proceedings are disposed of, subject to revival if payment is not made. The settlement leaves unresolved the validity of NPA classification and debt assignment, including whether compensation should be measured by debt value or acquisition value.

Statutory presumptions of consideration and legally enforceable cheque liability under the Negotiable Instruments Act are rebuttable. An accused may establish a probable defence on a preponderance of probabilities through direct evidence or circumstances, shifting the burden to the complainant to prove the debt. Pre-presentation misuse complaints, stop-payment instructions, a disputed signature, inadequate proof of loan source or financial capacity, missing security documents, and consultancy dealings may cumulatively make liability improbable. Non-reply to a statutory notice or non-production of the original stop-payment instruction does not bar that defence.

GST return mismatches may justify scrutiny but cannot alone establish excess input tax credit or short payment of output tax. Gross ITC in GSTR-3B must be assessed with reversals to determine the net credit position, while differences between GSTR-9 and GSTR-9C require reconciliation with invoices, ledgers, books of account, and relevant return entries. For taxable and exempt supplies, Rules 42 and 43 require identification of exclusive and common credit before proportional reversal. Ex parte proceedings do not dispense with verification of records before confirmation of a demand.

Review of a 30-order GST appellate sample identifies disputes involving input tax credit, refunds, penalties, bill-to-ship-to transactions and Section 129. Input tax credit matters included remand for fresh, de novo adjudication and verification by the Proper Officer. Revenue penalty appeals were dismissed where the disputed amount fell below the prescribed monetary limit and no recognised exception was established. The review identifies a general, though non-universal, tendency for taxpayer appeals to be allowed, partly allowed or remanded and for Revenue appeals to be dismissed.

Mandatory pre-deposit for GST penalty-only appeals is contested where the challenged order predates 1 October 2025. Before that date, pre-deposit was calculated by reference to tax in dispute, leaving penalty-only orders without a tax-based deposit amount except in detention cases. Amendments thereafter require 10% of the penalty at first appeal and an additional 10% for Tribunal appeal. The dispute raises whether this later condition applies retrospectively and whether valid proper-officer appointment is a jurisdictional issue.

Rule 271 apportions composite income from own-grown rubber, coffee and tea that is manufactured or processed for sale. The prescribed portion is deemed taxable business income, while the balance retains its agricultural-income character. Products manufactured from raw rubber, coffee or tea procured from other cultivators generate wholly taxable business income. Business-income computation permits cultivation, manufacturing, marketing and selling expenses. Replacement planting costs for non-abandoned areas are allowable without reducing exempt replanting subsidy.

Under section 69(3) of the CGST Act, the Deputy Commissioner or Assistant Commissioner may release an arrested person on bail or otherwise only for a non-cognizable, bailable offence, exercising police-station officer powers subject to criminal-procedure safeguards. Conditions may include a personal bail bond, local surety, attendance before the investigating officer, and notice before leaving the country. Written communication of conditions, contact with a nominated person, prompt release upon compliance, timely production before a Magistrate when conditions remain unmet, custody safeguards, and maintenance of a bail register support the process.

Profit and cash diverge because sales are recognised before collection while operating, financing and statutory obligations mature independently. The cash conversion cycle-inventory days plus debtor days minus creditor days-identifies how long working capital remains trapped; rapid growth magnifies the funding requirement. Liquidity discipline requires prompt invoicing and collections, inventory control, fair supplier terms, and a rolling cash forecast based on actual payment behaviour. GST, TDS, provident fund and other statutory dues should be prioritised. Borrowing and invoice discounting may bridge timing gaps but do not replace working-capital control.

Founder bottlenecks occur when routine operational decisions remain dependent on promoter approval, creating delayed cash flows, lost sales, staff attrition, reduced valuation and key-person risk. A delegation-of-authority matrix should allocate decision rights through defined monetary and functional limits, reserving irreversible and material matters for the promoter while delegating routine, reversible decisions. Written rules, exception reporting and maker-checker controls can replace routine approvals, preserve oversight and strengthen internal financial controls.

Finance, cash, legal and compliance functions require daily bank visibility, independent reconciliations, a rolling 13-week direct cash forecast, payment controls, timely account closing and review of unusual journals and related-party balances. A compliance register should identify each obligation, entity, jurisdiction, due date, responsible preparer and reviewer, supporting evidence, status and escalation route. Governance requires defined reserved matters, reliable minutes, independent challenge, escalation processes and board or owner reporting covering strategy, liquidity, financial position, key performance indicators, material risks, compliance, people, concentrations and related-party transactions.

Retrospective service-tax relief applies to services supplied by authorised persons or sub-brokers to members of recognised or registered associations in relation to forward contracts where tax was not levied between 10 September 2004 and 30 June 2012. The relief, issued under the statutory power to exempt non-levied tax retrospectively, covers the disputed periods. Service-tax demands on qualifying sub-broker services for those periods are therefore unsustainable.