Section 107(4) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, contemplates an additional month after the three-month period for filing a statutory appeal. A delay of 28 days fell within that additional period, and the explanation was regarded as genuine despite supporting documents not being produced before the appellate authority. The delay was condoned, the rejection of the appeal was set aside, and the appeal was directed to be re-presented for a hearing and determination on merits.

Legally permissible corrections to GSTR-1 entries must be considered in assessment, rectification and appellate proceedings involving reverse-charge reporting. Failure to consider such a correction can vitiate an assessment for non-application of mind. Fresh consideration requires verification of amended returns, an opportunity for a hearing and a reasoned order before determining the tax liability.

Rule 142 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules provides for acknowledgement in Form GST DRC-04 of payments reported through Form GST DRC-03. Non-issuance of the acknowledgement and failure to consider a protest against inspection-stage payments rendered the orders concluding the tax proceedings unsustainable, and the payments were refundable. The 17-day delay in protesting did not justify rejecting the claim in the circumstances. The underlying tax liability was not determined on its merits.

Bail conditions require one local surety and another surety satisfactory to the Magistrate, replacing the requirement for two local sureties. Proof of the passport's existing deposit with the tax authorities and an undertaking not to seek its release without the trial court's permission replace a separate deposit requirement. The inability to obtain a second local surety had prevented the appellant from benefiting from bail.

Anticipatory bail can protect an accused from arrest on conditions without determining the underlying criminal allegations. In assessing bail, a commercial property transaction involving an advance and dishonoured cheques may be considered alongside the apparent use of criminal proceedings as a strong-arm tactic. Bail proceedings concern the accused's culpability, while tax authorities have mechanisms to address evasion. Courts deciding bail should not assume an adversarial role against the accused through tax-department reporting directions absent apparent and compelling circumstances.

Proportionate reversal of CENVAT credit under Rule 6 is treated as non-availment, and the rule gives the assessee an option. Where remand directions require verification of the amount reversed, reapplying the rule without verification is contrary to judicial discipline. Regular filing of declarations and returns, together with audit, is relevant to applying the extended limitation period to concessional-duty demands. Where extended limitation does not apply, demands are confined to the normal period, with cum-duty benefit for surviving demands. The absence of an allegation or evidence of mens rea is relevant to penalties on a manufacturer and its director.

Clubbing clearances of separately constituted units for SSI exemption requires a cumulative assessment of whether they operated as a single manufacturer. Family ties and shared facilities, marketing or transport are not independently conclusive; financial flow-back is relevant but not indispensable. Electronic printouts must satisfy Section 36B certification requirements, with their source, extraction and chain of custody established. Reliance on statements is subject to Section 9D safeguards, and alleged parallel accounts need sufficient independent corroboration of manufacture, removal and sale. Personal penalties under Rule 26 require identification of conduct satisfying the applicable provision; association alone is insufficient.

Excise liability for polythene bags made from polythene rolls involves the distinct name, character or use test and marketability, alongside job work and extended limitation for suppression of excise liability. No reasoning is stated on whether converting polythene rolls into bags constitutes manufacture, whether the bags are marketable, or whether extended limitation applies.

Interest on the refund of an investigation deposit treated as a pre-deposit is confined to the statutory rate under Section 35FF, rather than a rate higher than 6% per annum. Entitlement to a higher rate was raised as a substantial question of law in a statutory appeal, which was dismissed without interference with the challenged judgment.

Exclusive possession and the right to use deep freezers under dealer agreements constitute a deemed sale excluded from the definition of service under the Finance Act, 1994, even where the supplier retains ownership and can recover the freezers on termination. The refundable, interest-free security deposits do not constitute taxable consideration without a nexus to a service; the absence of an actual refund does not negate the contractual refund provision. The extended limitation period requires the tax department to establish a positive act of suppression with intent to evade tax. Registration for other service tax liabilities does not itself establish suppression concerning the freezer arrangement.

Cenvat credit cannot be disallowed solely for a mismatch between audited accounts and ST-3 returns without examining related differences in taxable value, tax liability and payments; return disclosure is not a condition of entitlement. Scrap sales are excluded from service tax as trading in goods, while separately accounted pre-sale vehicle logistics and handling charges do not constitute independent services. From 14 May 2015, consideration includes reimbursable expenditure charged in providing taxable services; outdoor-service and pick-up and drop receipts under a bilateral rather than pure-agent arrangement are taxable. Cancellation charges and insurance sub-broker commissions are taxable; the principal's tax liability or potential credit does not remove the sub-broker's liability. For the remaining liabilities, the interpretational nature of the disputes precludes extended limitation and section 78 penalties.

An adjudicating authority becomes functus officio after passing a final refund order and cannot seek fresh clarification to revisit the sanction. The show-cause notice defines the grounds of the departmental case, so review or appellate proceedings cannot introduce an unnotified ground to deny a sanctioned refund. Where the notice seeks clarification of service classification and other particulars, non-production of an export order or non-compliance with the Export of Service Rules, 2005 cannot be introduced as a new ground for denial.

Section 37C of the Central Excise Act, 1944 permits service by affixation on the authority's notice board and provides for deemed service upon prescribed affixation. Section 85 of the Finance Act, 1994 permits an appeal within two months of receipt, with a further month available for condonation. Limitation runs from valid deemed service, and delay beyond the condonable period cannot be excused. Notice-board affixation constituted valid service where personal delivery at the disclosed address failed and no new address had been supplied.

Statutory limitation for appeals, condonation of delay on medical grounds and writ jurisdiction in relation to a time-barred appeal arise in connection with service tax on works contract services. The allegations concern discrepancies between turnover reflected in income tax returns or Form 26AS and turnover disclosed in ST-3 returns, as well as non-payment of service tax for certain periods.

Charter hire of workover rigs raises classification issues under Maintenance, Management and Repair services, including incidental repair or maintenance and taxability following subsequent legislative or classificatory inclusion. Related issues include the extended limitation period, natural justice, compliance with remand directions and relief from penalty under Section 80. The Revenue's appeals were dismissed for low tax effect, with the question of law kept open.

Property involved in money laundering may be subject to confirmation of attachment and confiscation under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002. The immovable property remained subject to attachment as proceeds of crime. The appellant had been convicted of a scheduled drug offence; claimed masonry income was unsupported by income-tax returns or other proof, and the claimed ancestral property sale proceeds lacked supporting evidence. Cash deposits remained unexplained, and a withdrawal coincided with execution of the sale deed for the attached property.

Section 240A of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code removes specified resolution-applicant disqualifications for MSME promoters but does not exempt them from separate financial eligibility criteria prescribed under section 25. Promoters must satisfy the committee-approved net-worth requirement through the same invitation process as other applicants. Under regulation 36A, the resolution professional checks expressions of interest against the approved criteria and may reject non-compliant submissions without referring the proposal to the committee. The committee's commercial decisions are subject to limited review. Where the threshold is based on business scale and asset value rather than a creditor's claim, recomputation of that claim does not itself invalidate the threshold or require a revised information memorandum or fresh invitation.

Section 19 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code imposes a continuing duty on suspended management to assist and cooperate with the resolution professional. Creditor approval of a resolution plan and partial disclosure of records do not discharge that duty. Section 19(2) permits the resolution professional to seek directions, while Section 60(5) and Rule 11 of the National Company Law Tribunal Rules provide powers to impose costs for conduct in proceedings. Section 70 addresses punishment for misconduct without displacing those powers. An incorrect reference to an enabling provision does not invalidate a costs order if the power exists under another source of law.

Fraudulent or malicious initiation of insolvency proceedings for a purpose other than bona fide resolution may warrant recall of admission, termination of the process and a penalty. Material liabilities must be disclosed at initiation; a later creditor claim cannot cure deliberate concealment. Initiation requires valid corporate authorisation, and section 176 of the Companies Act does not protect acts performed after the company knew an appointment had terminated. A resolution plan becomes binding only upon approval by the adjudicating authority; committee approval and later party consent cannot sustain a process tainted by fraud at initiation. Earlier non-joinder of a resolution applicant does not prevent recall where the applicant is fully heard on appeal and suffers no prejudice.

A limited forensic audit may verify when a creditor appropriated a corporate debtor's security deposit if the creditor provides conflicting dates relevant to the insolvency resolution process. Verification may cover relevant accounting records and electronic data, with the audit confined to establishing the actual date of appropriation. The timing is material where the conflicting dates place appropriation either before the insolvency resolution process commenced or during the moratorium.