https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=466768 Denial of cross-examination of the person who retrieved electronic data did not vitiate the assessment because the data was obtained in the assessees' presence, certified by them, and no specific prejudice was shown. In contrast, best judgment assessment could not be imported into proceedings under section 74 of the CGST Act, 2017, because such power is expressly provided only in sections 62 and 63 and cannot be implied where the statute does not authorise it. The court held that tax must be levied only by authority of law under article 265, found the extrapolated assessments without jurisdiction to that extent, and quashed them. en-us Wed, 26 Nov 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 18 Feb 2026 20:11:07 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=466768 Denial of cross-examination of the person who retrieved electronic data did not vitiate the assessment because the data was obtained in the assessees' presence, certified by them, and no specific prejudice was shown. In contrast, best judgment assessment could not be imported into proceedings under section 74 of the CGST Act, 2017, because such power is expressly provided only in sections 62 and 63 and cannot be implied where the statute does not authorise it. The court held that tax must be levied only by authority of law under article 265, found the extrapolated assessments without jurisdiction to that extent, and quashed them. Case-Laws GST Wed, 26 Nov 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=466768