GST recovery from a deceased registrant's inherited estate requires proceedings to be initiated against the legal representative in an individual capacity, with effective notice and hearing. Recovery provisions permit liability to be recovered from the estate where the business has discontinued, but do not validate notices or orders issued solely in the deceased person's name. A legal representative's appearance or objection cannot cure that defect. The foundational breach of natural justice can justify writ intervention despite an available statutory appeal. Fresh proceedings may be taken lawfully against the rightful heir in respect of the inherited estate.

Timely credit of tax to the Electronic Cash Ledger may satisfy the payment condition for Section 128A amnesty where the amount is subsequently appropriated to the Electronic Liability Register through FORM GST DRC-03A. Rule 164(2) requires credit against the debit entry created by the relevant order, while timely ledger credit demonstrates that tax was received within the prescribed period. Although the proviso to Rule 88B(1) does not directly govern amnesty payments, it supports the legal significance of timely Electronic Cash Ledger credit. Delayed filing of the appropriation form should not alone defeat amnesty where substantive payment was timely made and later procedurally completed.

GST registration cancellation was set aside to allow a further revocation opportunity, considering the taxpayer's stated reasons for not pursuing available remedies and technical difficulties. Revocation required furnishing proposed returns, paying due taxes, and substantiating the intended place of business. Registration was to be restored if the revocation application was accepted.

Pre-trial bail in alleged fraudulent input tax credit matters engages Article 21, the presumption of innocence and the right to speedy trial. Detention before conviction is not punitive; bail remains the norm unless the prosecution establishes concrete risks of absconding, witness intimidation or evidence tampering, or other exceptional circumstances. Completion of investigation, filing of the complaint, absence of criminal antecedents, delayed charge-framing and a Magistrate-triable offence favour release where trial is unlikely to conclude within a reasonable time. Continued custody is unwarranted in those circumstances.

Criminal acquittal on benefit of doubt does not bar a departmental inquiry or require the disciplinary authority to reach the same result. Departmental proceedings apply the preponderance-of-probabilities standard and are not controlled by criminal evidentiary rules. Non-examination of a complainant does not invalidate disciplinary findings where other witnesses and relevant material corroborate the charge. When accepting inquiry findings, the disciplinary authority need not separately address every representation point. In intra-court writ review, concurrent factual findings may be disturbed only for perversity or an apparent legal error; reappreciation of supported evidence is impermissible. These principles support the continued operation of disciplinary dismissal.

Bagasse is non-excisable, so the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 do not require reversal of Cenvat credit on its clearance. Treating bagasse as an exempted item for this purpose is unsustainable, and the contrary circular was rescinded following the governing Supreme Court position. Consequently, no 6% Cenvat credit reversal is payable on clearance of bagasse.

Retrospective reclassification of excisable goods through a show cause notice requires a statutory enabling provision. Section 11A of the Central Excise Act, 1944 permits classification-related notices where duty has been short-paid or not paid, but does not independently authorise a notice proposing only a retrospective change in classification. A notice that neither alleges short payment or non-payment of duty nor identifies another statutory basis for retrospective reclassification lacks legal sustainability.

Retrospective service-tax exemption applied to services supplied by a sub-broker to a member of a recognised or registered association in relation to forward contracts during 10 September 2004 to 30 June 2012. Because the disputed services fell within that exempt period, the service-tax demand for 1 April 2008 to 31 March 2009 was unsustainable and was set aside.

Residential complex service covered buildings comprising more than twelve residential units under the Finance Act, 1994. Independent villas and apartments built under separate plot-sale and construction arrangements, with individual construction permissions, did not satisfy that statutory description. Board circulars clarified that developers and builders bore no service-tax liability before 1 July 2010. Consequently, construction of such independent residential units during January 2009 to June 2010 fell outside taxable residential complex service, rendering the service-tax demand unsustainable.

Service-tax exemption for services relating to electricity transmission or distribution covers maintenance and repair work directly integral to operating high-tension and low-tension lines and associated equipment, including re-stringing, strengthening, laying, sagging, binding and jumpering. Such work has a sufficient nexus with transmission or distribution, rendering the tax demand unsustainable. Extended limitation cannot apply merely because services were supplied to government bodies where the provider was registered and filed ST-3 returns; absent suppression, wilful misstatement, fraud, collusion or intent to evade, related penalties must be set aside.

Amounts collected by a club constituted under law from its own members, including entrance fees, membership subscriptions, health-club and swimming-pool subscriptions, and swimming-pool coaching charges, fell outside the pre-1 July 2012 service-tax levy on club or association services when collected solely for members' benefit. The principle of mutuality treated these member transactions as non-taxable, so the charges did not attract service tax and the demand was unsustainable.

Mechanical and project-engineering support supplied to an overseas holding company for its separate installation and commissioning contract with an Indian plant falls within Business Auxiliary Service. The Indian plant's payment of service tax on installation and commissioning does not alter the classification where the support provider did not itself supply those services to the plant. Where the recipient is outside India and consideration is received in foreign currency, the support qualifies as export of service under the Export of Service Rules, 2005, and is not liable to service tax.

Discretionary monetary thresholds under a borrowed appellate provision do not create an absolute bar to entertaining an appeal where a substantive classification dispute requires determination. Leasing scaffolding items does not attract service tax where the arrangement transfers the right to use the goods, together with possession and effective control, to the lessee. Treatment of the transaction as a deemed sale for VAT purposes, with VAT paid accordingly, supports its character as a transfer of the right to use rather than a taxable service.

FIR continuation solely on a Commission report is unsustainable where the direction requiring registration was stayed and later quashed as an omnibus measure issued without hearing affected persons. Prolonged, unexplained investigative inactivity, absence of a chargesheet, and lack of direct material against persons not named in the FIR may independently justify quashing under the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita. The Article 21 right to speedy trial extends to investigation, preventing criminal proceedings from remaining pending indefinitely without adequate justification.

Statutory appeals under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code must be filed within 45 days, with delay condonable for no more than a further 15 days. The resulting 60-day outer limitation period is non-extendable. Time spent obtaining a certified copy is not excluded where the application for that copy is made after expiry of the ordinary limitation period. Consequently, an appeal filed on the 62nd day falls outside the maximum condonable period, and review cannot reopen the time-barred appellate challenge.

Imported thermal/barcode printers fall under Customs Tariff Item 84433290 rather than 84433210, making differential duty recoverable only for the normal limitation period. A bona fide declared classification, available for verification at clearance amid a continuing classification dispute, does not establish suppression, wilful misstatement, or intent to evade duty; the extended-period demand and penalty therefore fail. Redemption fine cannot be imposed after the goods have been cleared and are unavailable for confiscation. The surviving liability is limited to differential duty for the normal limitation period.

Section 68 cannot support an addition of the entire sale proceeds from allegedly rigged penny-stock transactions without accounting for the corresponding recorded purchase cost. Where purchases and sales produce an overall net profit, any addition based on treating both legs as non-genuine is limited to the net amount arising from the transactions rather than gross sale receipts. Regular share-trading activity and the absence of a discernible taxable benefit from the alleged arrangement further support deletion of an addition based on gross sale proceeds.

Section 263 revision requires a sustainable basis that the assessment order is both erroneous and prejudicial to the Revenue. Allegations of accommodation entries must identify the assessee's payment and explain the nexus between the entities said to be involved. Information merely describing funds moving to one entity through an unexplained chain involving another does not establish a definite transaction requiring inquiry and cannot, by itself, show assessment error or prejudice to the Revenue.

Penalty proceedings under Section 271(1)(c) require the initiating notice to clearly state whether the allegation is concealment of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars. Failure to specify either distinct charge denies a meaningful opportunity to respond, shows non-application of mind, and invalidates both the notice and consequential penalty; the penalty was therefore deleted. Separate appellate hearing notices issued through the registered email address over an extended period, without any response or adjournment request, provided adequate opportunity. Accordingly, the ex parte appellate order did not breach principles of natural justice.

Cash deposits associated with business income declared under the presumptive taxation regime may, in the relevant factual context, be treated as business turnover despite incomplete reconciliation. Processing of the return under Section 143(1) did not justify treating the entire deposits as unexplained. The appropriate approach was a lump-sum addition rather than addition of all deposits, resulting in substantial relief.