Competition law procedure requires the Competition Commission to notify and hear an opposite party when departing from the Director General's findings. The penalty order concerning alleged abuse of dominance in viscose staple fibre supply was set aside because Grasim Industries was not given an opportunity to respond to the Commission's disagreement with the investigative findings. The matter was remanded for fresh, time-bound consideration without a finding on the merits.

Execution of a sale deed pursuant to the Supreme Court's direction completed the conveyance and entitled the purchaser to possession of the property covered by that deed. The Karnataka HC's analysis states that this entitlement extended to vacant possession of the five-acre parcel forming part of the purchased land. Respondent No. 2 was directed to deliver vacant possession by 28 February 2019.

Committees have been constituted to review or revise refund, rectification, and reduced-demand orders under the Rajasthan GST framework for financial years 2022-23 to 2024-25. They must verify the legality or propriety of such orders to safeguard revenue interests. Two committees comprising tax, audit, enforcement, compliance and accounts officers have been allocated specified tax zones, business audit wings and enforcement wings. They are required to commence work immediately and submit regular findings and reports to the Special Commissioner (GST).

Statutory pre-deposit compliance in GST appeals is described as a procedural requirement, requiring an opportunity to cure any deficiency before an appeal is rejected. The notes state that where the pre-deposit shortfall was rectified before the appellate authority issued its order, the appeal should proceed to determination on merits. Referring to similar High Court decisions, the text records that the appellate order was set aside and the GST appeal restored for fresh disposal after notice and adequate hearing.

Contractual reimbursement of GST on gas-transmission charges depends on a plausible reading of the Gas Sale Agreement, and an arbitral tribunal's construction is not displaced merely because another interpretation is possible. The notes state that reimbursement could not be sustained without admissible evidence linking GST-deposit receipts to the relevant gas transactions; reliance on unproved documents despite an unresolved objection offends natural justice. They also distinguish waiver from estoppel: waiver requires intentional relinquishment of a known right, while estoppel requires representation, reliance and alteration of position. Payment of prior invoices under a clause requiring payment before claims may preserve supply and does not, by itself, bar recurring invoice-based claims.

An efficacious statutory appellate remedy under the Finance Act, 1994 may preclude writ review of a service-tax adjudication order where no jurisdictional error is shown. The note states that the petitioner had not timely replied to the show-cause notice and filed a reply only after adjudication; the writ petition was therefore not examined on merits and the petitioner was relegated to the statutory appeal. It further records that time spent bona fide pursuing a writ petition, instituted within the appeal limitation period, may be excluded when computing limitation for the appeal. The petitioner was permitted to file the appeal within 30 days, with interim protection temporarily continued.

Failure to reply to a GST show-cause notice or participate in adjudication may warrant fresh consideration where non-participation resulted from inadequate information or instructions from an authorised representative and sufficient bona fide cause exists. The discussion stresses that principles of natural justice require a reasonable opportunity to file a reply, produce material and receive a personal hearing before the demand is determined. It also addresses writ jurisdiction despite an alternative GST appellate remedy, noting that judicial intervention may be available to secure an effective merits hearing. The deposited amount may be retained pending the outcome of fresh adjudication.

Condonation of delay should be considered through a justice-oriented approach where an appellant appearing without legal assistance could not file a condonation application or properly present grounds due to bona fide reasons, unavoidable circumstances and sufficient cause. The short delay was condoned because the appellant's lack of representation warranted an opportunity to pursue the statutory appeal with legal assistance. The appellate order was set aside, and the appeal was restored and remitted for fresh consideration on merits, with liberty to engage counsel and file additional grounds.

Ex parte GST adjudication orders passed after the taxpayer did not reply to show-cause notices or receive a hearing were set aside on the stated bona fide reasons, unavoidable circumstances and sufficient cause for the omission. A justice-oriented approach supported granting a further opportunity to file replies and participate in the proceedings. The matters for the relevant financial years were remitted for fresh adjudication from the reply stage, subject to the stipulated deposit and an opportunity of hearing; consequential recovery proceedings were also set aside.

Additional input tax credit benefits must be passed to each eligible homebuyer through a commensurate reduction in price. The Tribunal found that, although benefits were passed to four buyers, the balance remained unpaid to two and constituted contravention of the anti-profiteering requirement. Free additional construction work could not replace the mandated price reduction, regardless of its value or the buyers' acknowledgement. Interest was payable from collection of the higher amount until actual payment because recipients were deprived of their monetary entitlement. Penalty applied to the continuing contravention after the penal provision took effect, subject to the statutory exemption where the profiteered amount is deposited within the prescribed period.

Prompt credit of refunds under the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme is emphasised despite the Scheme's exclusion of statutory refund interest. The notes state that excluding interest under section 244A does not justify revenue officials retaining a refund determined through Form No. 4 for months. They identify claimed non-availability of a processing module and competing statutory work as inadequate explanations for recurring delays, and record directions to verify system constraints and ensure timely refund processing. The writ petition remained pending while additional time was granted to report on credit of the processed refund.

Section 144C requires an eligible assessee challenging a draft assessment order to file objections with both the Dispute Resolution Panel and the Assessing Officer; filing only with the Assessing Officer does not satisfy the statutory requirement. In the absence of Panel objections, the Assessing Officer may complete the assessment on the basis of the draft order under Section 144C(3). The note further states that a challenge to such final assessment should ordinarily proceed through the statutory appeal available under Section 246A, rather than writ jurisdiction where an efficacious appellate remedy exists. The reported writ petition was dismissed, with assessment merits left for appellate consideration.

Interim release of seized cash to the Income Tax Department was treated as a protective arrangement pending determination of its source, tax liability and ownership. The Trial Court required an indemnity bond and deposit of the amount in a nationalised bank fixed deposit with automatic renewal, preserving the parties' positions until final adjudication. The High Court found that this arrangement caused no prejudice warranting intervention under Articles 226 and 227, as all substantive issues remained open. The criminal petition challenging the interim arrangement was dismissed, while the income-tax proceedings were to be concluded expeditiously and further relief could be sought before the Trial Court.

Delayed furnishing of Form 10B does not defeat a charitable-trust exemption claim where the audit report is available before processing or completion of assessment and no independent ground exists to disallow application of income. The text applies the principle that a required audit certificate filed before the final assessment order allows the related claim to be considered, distinguishing a decision involving withdrawal from an exemption based on a declaration with an immediate assessment impact. On that basis, verification and allowance of exemption for application of income was affirmed; the Revenue's appeal failed and the cross-objection became academic.

A political contribution deduction under section 80GGC was unavailable where the recipient political party had not filed contribution reports since FY 2013-14 and therefore did not satisfy the conditions for exemption under section 13A in the relevant year. The note states that, following a co-ordinate Bench decision involving donations to the same party in the same year, a donation made through banking channels did not qualify for deduction. The claimed deduction was disallowed and the assessee's appeal was dismissed.

Transactions in vouchers are neither supplies of goods nor services where the voucher qualifies as money or as a non-specified actionable claim; GST may nevertheless apply to the underlying goods or services obtained on redemption. Principal-to-principal voucher trading, involving autonomous ownership and resale, is not taxable. Commission or fees received by agents for distribution and related obligations are taxable as services, as are separately supplied promotional, technology, customisation or support services. Breakage on unredeemed vouchers is not taxable where no underlying supply occurs and no agreement makes non-redemption a taxable act or forbearance.

Closely linked international transactions benchmarked together under TNMM should not be selectively segregated for separate testing where the aggregated approach has been accepted for other transactions. Intra-group service payments require evidence of services and benefits, and their arm's length price cannot be treated as nil under CUP without a comparable uncontrolled transaction. The notes also address deletion of a fixed-asset purchase mark-up adjustment through consistency with an earlier year. The dividend distribution tax treaty-rate claim was remitted pending resolution of the underlying legal issue. An additional refund claim may be raised before appellate authorities without filing a revised return, for determination of correct tax liability.

Protective assessment cannot be used to tax identical receipts in the same taxpayer's hands under alternative characterisations as business income and fees for technical services; the Revenue must adopt one assessment method. The notes state that remotely rendered services, without employee visits to India, did not create a permanent establishment under the India-UK DTAA, so business-income taxation under section 44DA was deleted. For fees for technical services, the post-2020 contractual arrangements require fresh examination of whether the services made technical knowledge or capability available to the Indian recipient; specialised services alone are insufficient. The fees-for-technical-services issue was remanded for verification, including UK tax treatment.

Tax-transparent UK partnerships determine treaty entitlement for their Indian-source income by reference to each partner's country of residence. The text distinguishes legal and professional services from fees for technical services, stating that legal-service receipts cannot be characterised as fees for technical services under section 9(1)(vii). It records deletion of the related addition, while requiring examination of the treaty liability of partners resident outside the UK under their respective treaties. Claimed advance-tax and tax-deducted-at-source credits require verification before being granted in accordance with law.

Rural agricultural land situated beyond the prescribed municipal limits is excluded from the definition of a capital asset. The notes explain that an official Tehsildar certificate based on a technical survey may establish the requisite aerial distance where the Revenue offers no cogent rebuttal or independent measurement; acquisition by a development authority or development potential does not alter the land's character. Enhanced compensation for compulsory acquisition is therefore not chargeable under the capital gains provisions. Interest awarded under section 28 of the Land Acquisition Act is described as an accretion to land value and an integral part of enhanced compensation, so its tax treatment follows the underlying compensation rather than being separately taxed as income from other sources.