The Bombay High Court ruled that show cause notices under Section 74 of the CGST Act must be issued separately for each financial year, as limitation periods differ annually, making consolidated notices across multiple tax periods inconsistent with the statutory framework.
The Gujarat High Court flagged a “worrying trend” of quasi-judicial orders relying on AI-generated, dubious case law. In proceedings involving Marhaba Overseas Pvt. Ltd., it found GST order citations untraceable or wrongly attributed to different courts, raising serious concerns.
The Karnataka High Court ordered State tax authorities to refund GST collected from Divyasree Tarbus Builders Private Limited, retaining only the mandatory deposit under Section 112 CGST Act, granting relief under Circular No. 224/18/2024-GST pending GST Appellate Tribunal constitution.
The Orissa High Court held Section 161 allows only apparent error correction, mandating reasoned scrutiny of records and materials. A Division Bench of Harish Tandon and Murahari Sri Raman faulted authorities for ignoring ITC reconciliations, quashing the rejection infirm.
