Grievance redressal concerning implementation of tax laws is assigned to a committee chaired by an Assistant Commissioner and comprising two additional Assistant Commissioners. The committee is tasked with addressing concerns raised by tax professionals associations and trade bodies regarding tax-law implementation. It must submit its report within 15 days from its constitution, creating an internal departmental mechanism to examine and report on implementation-related grievances.

Jurisdiction under the Delhi Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 is allocated through geographical wards and zones for State Tax officers. Zones 1 to 9 cover specified localities across Delhi, while separate citywide arrangements apply to e-commerce, identified high-taxpayer categories, works contract and service suppliers, and transactions involving the right to use goods. Unspecified areas fall within the nearest ward, and taxpayers remain in existing wards until transfer. Each zone and ward has designated senior and field-level State Tax leadership. The arrangement operates retrospectively from implementation of the Delhi GST Act.

Hon'ble Judges P.P. Naolekar, J. For the applicant : L.R. Mehta, Arun Bhansali, R.C. Kasliwal, I.K. Jain, P.C. Shah, R.P. Dave, D.K. Jain, Digamber, Swetamber Jains, M.M. Vyas, H.N. Calla, Advs. and L.S. Udawat, Addl. Adv. General ORDER P.P. Naolekar, J. 1. Since common questions of law and facts are involved in both these petitions; they are being decided by this common order. 2. These petitions are filed claiming the reliefs amongst others which are relevant as submitted by ... ... ...

Functions under sections 78 and 79 of the Delhi Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 are assigned to all Assistant Commissioners and Goods and Services Tax Officers of the Department of Trade and Taxes. The officers may perform these functions as a proper officer, subject to the statutory definition of that expression and the Rules made under the Act.

EPCG actual-user compliance is met where imported vehicles remain in the authorised hotel business and no evidence proves their diversion. Residential parking, driver statements, insurance classification, or registration irregularities do not independently establish breach; registration and insurance matters fall to competent regulators. Export-obligation enforcement cannot precede expiry of the prescribed eight-year period where foreign-exchange earnings have been declared and discharge has been sought from DGFT. On those facts, confiscation, denial of concessional duty, and penalties for alleged actual-user or export-obligation breaches are unsustainable.

Powers under section 83 of the Delhi GST Act, 2017 are delegated to Assistant Commissioners and Goods and Services Tax Officers as Proper Officers. Exercise of the delegated power requires prior, case-specific approval from the concerned Zonal Incharge, Special Commissioner, Additional Commissioner, or Joint Commissioner.

Section 74 requires fraud, wilful misstatement, or suppression of facts with intent to evade tax; mere GST non-payment is insufficient. Material evidence of those elements must be included in the show-cause notice. Section 74A introduces a common limitation period for fraud and non-fraud cases, while retaining the fraud distinction at adjudication for higher penalties where intentional tax evasion or ineligible input tax credit is established. Legacy-period notices under Section 74 may therefore be examined for whether they disclose the necessary factual basis for invoking the fraud-based provision.

Separate show cause notices arising from a common customs investigation retain independent legal identity where they concern distinct subject matters and statutory consequences. Common assignment to one adjudicating authority and joint hearings are matters of administrative convenience and do not create a composite proceeding. An interim stay confined to one notice cannot be extended by implication to restrain adjudication under another notice. Challenges involving relied-upon material, hearing opportunity, limitation, extensions, or Call Book treatment may be examined through the statutory appellate process or before the competent forum.

Revisional proceedings under Section 263 against a corporate debtor cannot be continued or culminate in a revisional order during the subsistence of the moratorium. Following cessation of the moratorium, revisional proceedings may be revived and reframed if permissible under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, the Income-tax Act, and applicable law, with reasonable opportunity of hearing afforded through the resolution professional or another competent representative of the corporate debtor.

Customs Broker liability for import undervaluation depends on the broker's own conduct, involvement and diligence, not solely on the importer's declaration. Penalty liability and penalty quantum are distinct inquiries. A prior request for first-check examination before assessment may evidence bona fide conduct by bringing the goods to the Department's notice, although it does not automatically prevent penalty. Documented compliance, including client advice, examination requests, correspondence and checklists, may materially influence the assessment of culpability and proportionality of penalty.

Input tax credit on construction for leasing depends on whether the property is constructed on own account. Construction intended for sale, lease or licence forms part of a taxable commercial supply and differs from construction for personal use or premises from which business is directly carried on. Credit claims for leased properties require application of this distinction before the blocked-credit provision is invoked. This approach supports creditability of construction inputs where completed property is intended for leasing and promotes tax neutrality.

The National Assessment Centre Portal serves as a central digital repository for customs assessment information, including NAC decisions, advance rulings, audit objections, legal decisions, advisories, classification and valuation material, and trade-facilitation committee deliberations. Searchable access is intended to help importers, Customs Brokers and officers research assessment issues, promote consistent treatment of similar goods, and reduce divergent practices. NACs must regularly upload and manage information within their allocated commodity and functional domains, with priority for matters requiring uniform assessment guidance.

Customs classification must reflect the imported goods' intrinsic function and specific tariff description, with specific entries prevailing over general or residuary entries. Section 28 is a duty-recovery mechanism and cannot independently alter classification in a completed assessment without a differential duty demand. Wrong classification alone does not establish suppression or wilful misstatement for extended limitation; cogent evidence of culpable conduct is required. Penalties and confiscation require independent statutory grounds, while interest on differential IGST requires clear statutory authority.

Facilitated Bills of Entry for cosmetics, drugs and medical devices remain subject to mandatory CDSCO-related document verification before Out-of-Charge. Importers must provide applicable registrations, licences or permissions, commercial documents, compliant labels, batch-specific quality records, storage-premises documentation, declarations and undertakings. Product descriptions, pack sizes, quantities, manufacturer details, batches and dates must match the relevant regulatory approval and import documents. Residual shelf-life requirements apply to cosmetics, drugs and medical devices, while APIs require QR-code traceability. Discrepancies or doubts may lead to referral to the relevant CDSCO port office. Required documents should be uploaded on e-SANCHIT.

Statutory remedy before the Debts Recovery Tribunal under the SARFAESI Act was made available despite expiry of the ordinary limitation period where the auction purchaser had diligently pursued a writ challenge after refusal of refund. The Tribunal must consider on merits whether non-disclosure of a subsisting attachment in an auction sale breached the requirement to disclose material facts concerning the property's nature and value. The application may be filed within the prescribed three-week period and must be accepted without a separate application for condonation of delay.

Revisional jurisdiction under Section 56(1) could not be exercised by a Joint Commissioner (Executive) without a notification, circular, statutory delegation, or authorisation from the Commissioner. A jurisdictional defect goes to the root of the matter and may be raised at any stage, including in revision. In the absence of material establishing delegated or authorised power, revisional proceedings initiated by the Joint Commissioner (Executive) were void from inception.

Priority of a registered security interest under the SARFAESI Act over crown debts, including sales tax, commercial tax and income-tax dues, depends on the statutory registration and priority framework. The issues also concern registration of auction sale certificates despite attachments and remittance of auction-sale surplus to tax departments. The Special Leave Petition challenging these matters was dismissed because the 878-day delay was not satisfactorily explained. The legal questions on priority, attachment and sale-certificate registration were left open for determination in an appropriate matter.

Cenvat credit eligibility turns on the statutory nexus of goods or services with manufacture. Services used to establish and install a manufacturing facility may qualify as input services despite pre-production use, and common infrastructure outside factory boundaries may qualify where it supports industrial operations without personal use. Goods used within the factory may be inputs even if they are neither capital goods nor components of final products. Differential duty claimed through a post-GST supplementary invoice requires correlation with the original clearance and revised value. Credit reversals and utilisation-based interest require reconciliation of statutory records, with no duplicate recovery. Extended limitation and penalties require positive evidence of suppression or wilful misstatement intended to evade duty.

Unjust enrichment restricts a service-tax refund under Section 11B to the portion for which the claimant proves that the duty burden was not passed to another person. An auditor's certificate may establish whether the incidence was recovered, but recovery from members demonstrates that the burden was passed on to that extent. Refund is therefore available only for the uncollected portion of Rs. 6,41,369, while the amount recovered from members is barred from refund. Applicable interest is payable under Section 11BB on the refundable amount.

Late-payment charges imposed for delayed payment for supplied industrial gases, though described as interest, constitute damages for breach rather than consideration for an obligation to tolerate an act or situation. A declared service requires consideration, which is absent where the amount is a consequence of an undesired act, breach, or unanticipated situation. Such late-payment charges therefore do not qualify as a taxable declared service and are not liable to service tax.