Reassessment for assessment year 2015-16 was stated to be barred because the six-year limitation period under the former regime expired on 31 March 2022. The relaxation framework under the Taxation and Other Laws (Relaxation and Amendment of Certain Provisions) Act, 2020 did not extend time for a notice issued after that expiry. Supreme Court rulings were identified as requiring reassessment notices for that year issued on or after 1 April 2021 to be dropped. Consequently, a notice issued under section 148 on 3 April 2022 was described as time-barred, depriving the reassessment proceedings of jurisdiction and requiring the assessment under section 147 to be quashed.

Interest awarded under Section 28 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 on enhanced compensation for compulsorily acquired agricultural land is characterised as an accretion to the land's value and forms part of enhanced compensation, rather than income from other sources. This differs from interest under Section 34, which compensates for delayed payment. Amendments governing taxation of interest on compensation address the timing of taxation and do not change the character of Section 28 interest. A contrary High Court view was treated as inapplicable against the Supreme Court position, and a non-speaking dismissal of a special leave petition was not a binding declaration of law.

Paragraph 12 of the Faceless Appeal Scheme, 2021 requires the Commissioner (Appeals) to grant a requested personal hearing through video conferencing or video telephony. Where an assessee's undisputed request for such a hearing is not considered before the appellate order, the prescribed opportunity of hearing is denied and principles of natural justice are breached. The appellate order was therefore set aside and the matter restored for de novo adjudication after providing a video-conferencing hearing.

Statutory GST appellate remedy was treated as adequate despite allegations that cross-examination was denied and a payment was disregarded. Section 107(11) of the CGST Act permits the Appellate Authority to conduct further inquiry and confirm, modify or annul the challenged order, although it cannot remand the matter. The appellate process can address factual and legal grievances, including the need for cross-examination and accounting for an asserted payment; the payment had been considered in the challenged order. Writ jurisdiction was therefore not invoked, and the petitioner was relegated to appeal with liberty to seek exclusion of the writ-pendency period for limitation.

Appeals against cancellation of GST registration that were rejected solely as time-barred may be restored for merits consideration. Where the taxpayer is permitted to file an appeal within the stipulated period, the Appellate Authority must consider it on merits rather than reject it on limitation. The limitation-based appellate rejection is set aside, enabling adjudication of the registration-cancellation dispute on merits.

Whether the Delhi Jal Board qualifies as a local authority for GST purposes was identified as requiring determination because it affects the GST rate applicable to contracts executed by association members. The challenge also concerns an alert circular. Interim protection available in an analogous pending matter was extended to eligible members, subject to payment of deficient court fees and individual affidavits undertaking to be bound by the eventual decision. Proceedings under the impugned show-cause notices were stayed for those eligible members pending further consideration.

Composite show cause notices under Sections 73 or 74 of the CGST/KGST enactments cannot validly combine multiple tax periods or financial years. Clubbing, consolidation, bunching or combining distinct periods in one notice lacks legal authority. Consequently, notices and summaries covering tax periods from 2019-20 to 2023-24 were invalid, and the consequential proceedings were quashed in favour of the assessee.

Cancellation of GST registration for non-filing of returns and non-payment of tax should be addressed through revocation proceedings. The taxpayer must seek revocation, furnish proposed returns, and deposit tax dues. The registering authority must receive the payment and decide the revocation application within the prescribed period, accepting a manual application where online filing difficulties arise. The challenge to cancellation is thereby addressed through consideration of revocation under the stipulated process.

Statutory appellate remedy against a GST penalty adjudication order must ordinarily be exhausted before invoking writ jurisdiction. No basis existed to bypass the appeal before the Appellate Authority. The writ petition was not entertained, and the petitioner must pursue the statutory appeal. The period spent pursuing the writ petition is excluded when calculating the limitation period for that appeal.

Electronic invoicing eligibility and scope under the Arunachal Pradesh GST framework are amended under rule 48(4). The turnover reference is expanded from a financial year to any preceding financial year beginning with 2017-18 onwards. The relevant supply coverage is also extended to exports, in addition to supplies of goods or services or both made to registered persons.

Annual return filing deadline under the Arunachal Pradesh GST framework was extended through an amendment to Notification No. 39/2020-State Tax. The Commissioner, acting under the annual-return provision and prescribed return rule on the Council's recommendations, replaced the earlier deadline of 30 September 2020 with 31 October 2020.

Revisionary jurisdiction cannot be used to reopen a bad-debt deduction claim that was scrutinised, verified and accepted in both assessment and reassessment proceedings. The claim concerned bad debts written off against provisions created before the statutory treatment applicable to co-operative banks. Further verification of the same settled issue would improperly unsettle completed assessments. The revision order was therefore without jurisdiction, and the bad-debt deduction remained allowable.

CRISP establishes randomized, cross-zone, round-robin allocation of eligible annual GST return scrutiny cases to promote impartiality, uniformity, workload balancing, and monitoring. A CRISP Review Officer conducts analytical scrutiny, records reasoned discrepancies and draft ASMT-10 inputs, but cannot communicate with taxpayers or issue notices. The jurisdictional proper officer independently assesses each report and alone may issue ASMT-10 and conduct statutory proceedings. Every recommendation requires recorded action and reasons for acceptance, modification, rejection, dropping, or pendency. Excluded matters include investigation, special audit, inspection or search matters, court-directed cases, and initial-phase corporate cases.

Insolvency resolution against a personal guarantor may proceed where the guarantee is admitted, its terms permit creditor recourse, and the Resolution Professional establishes subsisting debt, default and service of demand notice. Unsupported claims of repayment do not negate the default. A possible settlement and the pending insolvency process of the corporate debtor do not displace the basis for action against the guarantor. On these facts, the application for initiation of insolvency resolution process against the personal guarantor was admitted.

The Supreme Court issued notice in a special leave petition concerning an income-tax dispute. It directed the respondent to file a counter-affidavit within four weeks from service of notice and permitted a rejoinder within two weeks thereafter. The text records procedural directions only and does not state any substantive determination on the underlying tax issues.

The deadline for furnishing FORM GSTR-3B for March 2026 is extended to 21 April 2026 for registered persons subject to the applicable Jharkhand GST return-filing provisions. The extension is issued by the Commissioner on the recommendations of the GST Council and is deemed effective from 20 April 2026.

Jharkhand SGST rate schedules under Notification No. 9/2025-State Tax (Rate) are amended by substituting specified tariff entries in Schedule I taxable at 2.5% and Schedule III taxable at 20%. The amendments, issued under the Jharkhand Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 on the Council's recommendations, are deemed effective from 1 May 2026.

Forgery of Indian identity and supporting documents is alleged in an interstate racket using false birth, domicile and school certificates to obtain Aadhaar cards for foreign nationals. The racket allegedly misused authorised Aadhaar enrolment operator login credentials and used virtual private networks and remote access to enrol applicants. The alleged mastermind was arrested, and investigation, including proposed custodial interrogation, remains ongoing.

GST appellate filing timelines under section 112(1) provide that appeals against orders communicated before 1 April 2026 may be filed before the Appellate Tribunal up to 30 June 2026. Appeals against orders communicated on or after 1 April 2026 may be filed within three months from communication of the order.

Telangana SGST exemption notification is amended to replace the definition of "Nominated Agency". The revised definition includes entities specified in Lists 13, 14 and 15 appended to Table I of the referenced Customs notification. Issued under the State Government's exemption power on the GST Council's recommendations, the amendment takes effect from 1 November 2025.