GST adjudication must apply the same statutory framework to officials and taxpayers, with lawful and reasoned orders. Sale of land is treated under Schedule III, subject to the stated building-sale qualification, as neither a supply of goods nor services; GST deduction from land-acquisition compensation by characterising it as a works contract service is criticised as contrary to that scheme. Proposed safeguards include personal hearings, reasonable adjournments, demand limits tied to the SCN, and effective notice where no portal response is filed.

Limitation for an appeal under Section 62 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, commences upon pronouncement of the appellate order, not upon actual receipt of its certified copy. Section 12(2) permits exclusion of the day of pronouncement and the time genuinely required to obtain the copy, but not delay before applying for it or after receipt. The normal period is 45 days, with a further 15 days condonable only on sufficient cause; the maximum period cannot be enlarged.

GST challenges should, on the approach advanced, follow the statutory appellate hierarchy. An Order-in-Original should be challenged before the first appellate authority, and an Order-in-Appeal should be challenged through a second appeal before the Goods and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal. Writ recourse before the jurisdictional High Court is proposed only after Tribunal adjudication where strong legal grounds remain. Pending GST writ petitions are proposed for transfer to the jurisdictional Tribunal, reflecting its specialised GST jurisdiction and capacity for reasoned appellate review.

Admission of cheque execution triggers presumptions of consideration and legally enforceable liability under the Negotiable Instruments Act, rebuttable only through a consistent probable defence on a preponderance of probabilities. Inconsistent claims that a cheque was lost or stolen do not meet that standard. A dishonour marked "refer to drawer" may support cheque-dishonour liability, and crediting the cheque to an account connected with the payee's business can satisfy payee and presentment requirements where the nexus is established. Cash-loan contraventions under income-tax law do not, by themselves, render the underlying debt unenforceable. Revisional jurisdiction does not permit fresh appraisal of evidence absent perversity in concurrent findings.

Admission of a cheque signature activates statutory presumptions of consideration and legally enforceable debt, placing the drawer under a reverse onus to establish a probable defence on a preponderance of probabilities. A lost-cheque account supported only by a General Diary entry and stop-payment instructions, without independent corroboration or prompt action, does not displace those presumptions. Absence of a written loan agreement or income-tax disclosure does not by itself negate a modest hand loan where the lender's financial capacity is not probably challenged. A proprietary concern has no legal identity separate from its sole proprietor. Revisional jurisdiction is limited to patent illegality, perversity, jurisdictional error, or gross miscarriage of justice.

Licensed surveyor assessments under the Insurance Act, 1938 are not conclusive but may determine insured loss unless displaced by cogent and reliable contrary material. Technical, expert, eyewitness, or documentary evidence may be required to challenge loss quantification, including depreciation, valuation, and underinsurance calculations. Where an insured cannot substantiate an error in the surveyor's assessment, enhanced insurance recovery is unavailable. Enhanced interest likewise requires an independent factual basis and cannot arise merely because the insured seeks a higher loss assessment. The principle permits reliance on licensed surveyor reports while allowing rebuttal through reliable evidence.

Retrospective withdrawal of net SGST reimbursement under IPR 2015 from cement manufacturing and grinding units is impermissible where an industrial unit acted on the policy, obtained approvals, invested and commenced production; financial implications alone do not establish overriding public interest to displace promissory estoppel and legitimate expectation. Policy revisions may operate prospectively. Section 11 of the Orissa Industries (Facilitation) Act, 2004 and applicable guidelines provide deemed approval of provisional Priority Sector status where a covered application remains undecided within the prescribed period. The Negative List does not apply where the investment threshold is exceeded and cement is manufactured with clinker, subject to verification and remaining policy conditions.

CENVAT credit for contractor services requires a transaction-wise review of work orders and invoices. The input-service exclusion applies only where a specified construction or works-contract service is used for constructing a building or civil structure, or for foundations or structures supporting capital goods; machinery installation, repair, maintenance and equipment hire are not automatically excluded. Extended limitation requires a proved act of fraud, suppression or other contravention with intent to evade; credits disclosed in statutory records and examined in audit cannot be denied on a mere interpretive dispute. Penalty cannot rest on unproved suppression or a new ground on remand. Interest arises only on credit within the normal period that is found ineligible and utilised.

CENVAT credit is admissible for 1%/2% additional duty of customs paid on imported coal because Rule 3(1)(vii) independently permits credit of additional customs duty equivalent to specified excise duties. The proviso to Rule 3(1)(i), which restricts credit of specified excise duty where a central excise exemption is used, does not apply to imported coal subject to additional customs duty under the customs exemption notification.

Scheduled predicate offences and material indicating transfer or layering of loan proceeds support a money-laundering investigation and the use of statutory summons to obtain evidence and documents. Pending challenges to the predicate FIR or investigation do not, by themselves, remove jurisdiction to investigate proceeds of crime. A proposed bank loan settlement or repayment does not independently terminate allegations involving fraud, forgery, or diversion of funds. Blanket protection from coercive action or arrest is not available through summons-quashing proceedings; anticipatory-bail relief must be sought through the competent court. Statutory investigation and compliance with summons may therefore continue.

Reasoned adjudicatory orders must disclose the evidence and reasons supporting a finding; reasoning cannot be inferred from factual narration or material outside the order's stated grounds. Although the company's explanation for seized Indian and foreign currency was accepted and it was exonerated of contraventions, the separate penalty finding against the appellant identified no further supporting material. The dismissal therefore required fresh, reasoned adjudication.

Authorised representatives of creditors in a class must both record consultation proceedings and prepare minutes identifying the consultation, date, participation, and creditors' views; contemporaneous emails may be incomplete where they omit participation details. They must obtain prior instructions before concurring to extensions for revised resolution plans, even if the request is administrative or time-bound. Under a graduated disciplinary regime, cancellation requires a proportionate response: absent fraud, dishonesty, personal gain, conflict, concealment, stakeholder prejudice, or prior misconduct, incomplete documentation and limited unauthorised procedural action may not justify the maximum sanction.

Remand for a fresh reasoned decision permits reappreciation of an enlarged record but requires reasons for departing from previously relevant matters. Under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, a Section 9 application cannot serve as a recovery mechanism for genuinely contested operational debt: the inquiry is whether a plausible dispute existed before the demand notice, not whether the defence is conclusively proved. Returned goods, contemporaneous complaints, supporting media and laboratory material may establish a quality dispute, while contested evidentiary weight, contractual stipulations and liability remain for appropriate proceedings. Implied merchantable quality need not depend on a written quality clause. A plausible pre-existing quality dispute prevents insolvency admission.

Payment made as consideration under a share-purchase arrangement requires independent proof that it was disbursed against consideration for the time value of money before qualifying as financial debt under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code. Accounting classification as an unsecured loan, balance confirmations, interest entries, or tax-deduction entries may acknowledge an amount but do not alter the payment's original character. An unproven oral conversion into an interest-bearing loan cannot establish the required debt in summary insolvency proceedings. Clerical recording errors do not affect merits absent prejudice. Any available recovery must be pursued before the appropriate forum rather than through corporate insolvency.

Tender bidders whose participation rights or accepted bids are displaced by cancellation and revival of an expired earlier contract have standing to challenge the revival. A former contractor that voluntarily participates in an unchallenged replacement tender acquiesces in that process and waives any claim to continued performance under the original contract. Orders made during insolvency and an approved resolution plan do not extend an expired works contract; statutory protection for specified governmental grants does not require contractual renewal. Reviving the contract at original rates without transparent competition after a substantial lapse is arbitrary and contrary to public interest. Remaining works must be awarded through a transparent competitive process.

Section 212(1)(c) requires an opinion, founded on cogent and relevant objective material, that an SFIO investigation is necessary in the public interest. Although the satisfaction is subjective, the assignment order must itself disclose the relevant circumstances, independent application of mind, and reasons for both investigation and SFIO assignment; it remains subject to judicial review. An order merely reciting statutory power, without demonstrable reasons, cannot be cured by later minutes, affidavits, or investigation reports, and invalidates consequential proceedings. Earlier dismissal of a co-accused's writ petition as premature, without merits adjudication, does not create res judicata against pending petitions.

Car Radio Units imported in completely built form are classifiable under Customs Tariff Item 8527 21 00 as motor-vehicle radio-broadcast receivers combined with sound-reproducing apparatus. Under Rule 3(b) of the General Rules for Interpretation, FM/AM reception and sound reproduction determine the units' essential character; touchscreen, connectivity, playback, camera-input and phone-mirroring features remain ancillary. Semi-knocked-down kits are also classifiable under that item where the screen panel, PCBA and cable set are presented together, have the finished unit's essential character, and need only simple assembly, testing and configuration under Rule 2(a). BIS certification requirements remain applicable at import.

Revocation of a customs broker's licence and forfeiture of security are disproportionate responses to an isolated failure to verify an exporter's authorisation and address when the broker had no active role in an attempted prohibited export, promptly dismissed the responsible employee, initiated criminal action, and acted without deliberateness or bad faith. The licensing breach nevertheless justified a monetary penalty. Principles applicable to repeated or continuing violations do not apply where the lapse is isolated and the factual record discloses neither legal error nor perversity.

Section 108 customs summons may be complied with through secure video conferencing where bona fide medical inability prevents long-distance travel. Virtual examination can fulfil the purpose of a customs enquiry while ensuring that summons powers are exercised reasonably, proportionately and without undue hardship, consistent with Articles 14 and 21. Recorded medical injury and willingness to cooperate support this arrangement. Safeguards include secure access, identity verification, videography, visible but non-audible counsel presence, and prior reasoned notice if physical attendance later becomes necessary. Continued cooperation with the investigation remains required.

Condonation of delay in customs appeals requires a plausible, specific and bona fide explanation demonstrating diligence. Limitation law applies equally to Government departments; administrative delay, procedural red tape and unsupported blame on counsel do not constitute sufficient cause. Vague assertions that files were transferred, retrieved, or required further documents, without explaining follow-up or delay at each stage, fail the required standard. The 154-day delay therefore lacked sufficient cause for condonation.