GST search and inspection under section 67 require authorisation by a Joint Commissioner or higher officer on specified grounds, with Form GST INS-01 identifying the applicable ground and premises. Search powers are premise-specific and do not extend to unlisted locations. Liability must be determined through adjudication under section 73 or section 74; on-site recovery is valid only where payment is genuinely voluntary and free from coercion. Seizures must be documented in a panchnama, and cash may be seized only upon a direct and demonstrable nexus with tax evasion.

Section 107 fixes a mandatory appellate timetable: an appeal must be filed within three months, with condonation on sufficient cause for no more than one additional month. The First Appellate Authority has no equitable or inherent jurisdiction beyond that ceiling, and Article 226 relief cannot enlarge its statutory power. Yet, where delayed appeals were implemented, registrations restored, compliance verified, and businesses resumed operations, a later departmental challenge may be incapable of effective relief because reversal could disturb supplies, invoicing, and recipients' input tax credit. Revocation and appeal remain distinct remedies, though an appeal remains subject to statutory limitation.

Employment agreements requiring personal service are service disputes rather than commercial disputes, notwithstanding remuneration, high stakes, sales-related payments, confidentiality obligations, non-compete conditions, or intellectual-property assignments. Claims for salary, reimbursements, incentives, or commission arising from that relationship are outside Commercial Court jurisdiction. Where such a claim is filed before a Commercial Court, the plaint should be returned for presentation before the appropriate court rather than dismissed.

Mandatory pre-deposit in customs appeals requires seven and a half per cent deposit for first appeals and certain Tribunal appeals, and ten per cent for Tribunal appeals against Commissioner (Appeals) orders, subject to an overall cap of rupees ten crores. The post-2014 regime removed appellate discretion to waive or reduce pre-deposit. Restoration of guided discretion is advocated by reference to prima facie merits, applicable precedents, relative case strength, financial capacity, business operations, and hardship affecting continuity and employment.

Section 6(2)(b) of the CGST Act bars parallel action by Central and State GST authorities only where both proceedings concern the same liability, deficiency, or contravention requiring adjudication. Common registered person, financial year, supplier, input tax credit amount, or overlapping factual background does not establish identity. Changing provisions cannot avoid the bar if the underlying contravention is unchanged; however, a later fraud-based input tax credit proceeding involving invoices without actual supply may remain distinct from a general input tax credit eligibility or mismatch proceeding.

Provident-fund sums due to employees are excluded from the liquidation estate, but statutory interest and damages that were not determined before commencement of the corporate insolvency resolution process may be contingent liabilities. A resolution plan may provide for determined provident-fund dues without separately providing for uncrystallised interest and damages. The committee of creditors may reserve an amount for such contingencies, but is not required to do so merely because liability may later arise. Resolution applicants must be able to identify assumed liabilities within the fixed insolvency timeline.

Advocate-client privilege protects confidential professional communications, not every record held in an Advocate's office or digital device. A GST inquiry may distinguish privileged advice from the Advocate's own alleged commercial, financial or operational conduct where prima facie material connects that conduct to the investigation. Search powers may apply to an Advocate's cabin within authorised premises, while examination of seized electronic data requires cloning, supervised access, segregation of unrelated client files, and use confined to material relevant to the identified investigation.

Crane-hire arrangements constitute a transfer of the right to use goods only where the hirer obtains a legal and exclusive right to use the goods, rather than a mere licence. Retention by the supplier of ownership, insurance responsibility and substantive effective control indicates that the hirer receives temporary permitted use only. Hirers' provision of fuel does not alter that character. Accordingly, crane hiring on these terms is a service and not a deemed sale under the MVAT Act; MVAT, interest and penalty are not sustainable.

Rule 6 of the CENVAT Credit Rules applies only where common CENVAT inputs are used to manufacture both dutiable and exempted final products. Press mud and spent wash arising as waste or by-products during sugar and molasses manufacture do not become manufactured final products merely because they are treated as exempted goods after amendment. Organic manure produced by physically mixing those materials therefore remains outside Rule 6(2) and Rule 6(3). No Rule 6 amount is payable on its clearance, rendering the related demands unsustainable.

CENVAT credit under Rule 3 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 extends to inputs used in research and development operations that support the manufacture of excisable final products. Research and development constitutes an ancillary or incidental manufacturing activity where its results ultimately contribute to those products. Credit cannot be denied absent any finding or allegation that the research and development operations were unrelated to the manufacturing activity or final products.

Rule 6(3) of the CENVAT Credit Rules applies only where common credit is used for dutiable and exempted goods. Bagasse is treated as agricultural waste, not a manufactured excisable product. Consequently, surplus electricity generated from bagasse and sold outside the factory does not trigger the 6% payment mechanism, and no payment based on its sale value is required.

Railway-specific printed stationery intended exclusively for internal use is not dutiable where its printing gives it the essential character of products of the printing industry, placing it in Chapter 49 rather than Chapter 48. Excisability also requires marketability: articles bearing railway-specific particulars and usable only within the railway administration were not shown to be capable of being bought and sold. The central excise demand, interest and consequential penalty were therefore unsustainable.

Exemption for specified non-conventional energy devices and systems applies to a Dual Fuel Burner System supplied as a commercially and functionally integrated biomass-gasification installation; its individual components should not be separately classified to deny relief. Extension of exemption to specified parts does not displace eligibility of the complete system. Extended limitation for excise duty requires established suppression of facts or intent to evade duty. Voluntary disclosure of clearances and an interpretive exemption dispute do not meet those conditions, rendering the demand time-barred and the related interest and mandatory penalty unsustainable.

Valuation of excisable goods requires a nexus between any buyer-funded additional consideration and the transaction value of those goods. Separately charged mould-modification or repair services relating to existing moulds, whose original cost was already amortised, do not constitute additional consideration merely because the moulds are used in manufacture. Extended limitation and penalty require fraud, wilful misstatement, suppression, or intent to evade duty; disclosed records, returns, invoices and service-tax payments, coupled with an interpretative valuation dispute, do not establish those elements. Accordingly, separate mould-modification charges do not create excise liability in the stated circumstances.

Approval of an insolvency resolution plan binds confirmed government dues, including duty, interest and penalties, and causes abatement of the manufacturer's pending appeal under the Tribunal Procedure Rules. Excise duty liability follows the person clearing goods on excise invoices, even where that person is not the manufacturer; expenses incurred before clearance form part of assessable value. A transferee clearing acquired excisable stock from taken-over premises remains liable for duty and interest. Penalties requiring intent to evade duty or prior confiscation cannot be sustained without those elements, although established involvement in duty-evasion acts may attract a general penalty.

Education Cess and Higher Education Cess refunded under appellate orders applying the then-prevailing position on exempt excise duty remain protected where those orders attained finality. A subsequent overruling does not reopen such settled refunds. Where cess was later redeposited under protest, refund of the entire redeposited amount is available despite pending appeals concerning certain appellate refund orders, subject to an equivalent bank guarantee. The refund remains contingent on the outcome of pending appeals or other proceedings, while the guarantee safeguards revenue interests.

Foreign visa-processing services supplied under a bilateral arrangement are not intermediary services because intermediary status requires facilitation of a supply between two distinct parties. Their place of provision is therefore the recipient's location in India, making service tax payable under reverse charge. Visa fees remitted to the UAE Government through the foreign provider do not constitute consideration for the provider's services and are excluded from taxable value; only the provider's service charges are taxable. Non-disclosure of the foreign-service receipts until audit supports invocation of the extended limitation period, with interest and penalty recalculated on the revised tax liability.

Service tax valuation excludes separately invoiced freight and insurance reimbursements from the taxable value of erection and commissioning services where they represent actual amounts paid and not consideration for the taxable service. Service tax remained payable on the erection and commissioning charges, while goods transport agency liability was discharged under the reverse charge mechanism. In the absence of evidence that the recoveries exceeded actual freight and insurance costs, those reimbursements were not includible in the service value.

Cleaning, sanitation, garbage-removal, platform and coach maintenance, and onboard-housekeeping services supplied to Indian Railways perform municipal functions concerning public health, sanitation conservancy and solid-waste management and fall within the Entry 25(a) service-tax exemption. Extended limitation cannot rest on suppression where relevant financial statements, tax-information forms and returns were available for departmental scrutiny and intent to evade is unproved. Return non-filing or delay remains independently subject to statutory penalty and late fee. An investigation deposit against an unsustainable tax liability is refundable with applicable interest rather than subject to the service-tax refund procedure. An allegation that collected tax was retained requires conclusive proof of non-deposit.

Transportation forming the principal element of a composite arrangement, with loading merely ancillary, is classifiable as transportation rather than Cargo Handling Service under Section 66F(3)(a) of the Finance Act, 1994. Loading at a single point and separate contractual and billing arrangements did not establish specialised cargo-handling activity. Tax already discharged under a centralised registration cannot be demanded again under a surrendered registration for the same service and value. The extended limitation period was unavailable where the notice relied on income-tax returns and Form 26AS and the dispute concerned service classification. The service-tax demands, interest and penalties were consequently set aside.