The Supreme Court upheld the Madras High Court’s judgment that when a party alleges fiduciary misuse in property transactions executed through a General Power of Attorney (‘GPA’), that party must first prove the basic facts showing such fraud. The burden does not shift to the beneficiaries unless and until such foundational evidence is placed on record.

The CESTAT Chennai has allowed assessee’s appeal in a case where the Revenue department had alleged misdeclaration of imports by importing goods in CKD form as parts. The dispute in Subash Iyappan v. Commissioner involved import of e-vehicles, allegedly in CKD form and thus being not eligible for benefit of reduced customs duty. The Tribunal for this purpose noted the following:

The Gujarat High Court has declined to read down Section 16(2)(c) of the CGST Act and thus not declaring it ultra vires Part III of the Constitution of India, including Article 14 thereof. Not agreeing with the contentions of the assessee that they cannot be subjected to denial of ITC solely on the ground that the supplier had failed to deposit the tax with the State Government, the Court observed the following:

The Delhi High Court has held that the fact that the fungicide is made available to be used and sprayed at regions where the temperature would ordinarily go beyond 40°C, without crystallization, would clearly be an enhancement in the efficacy of the compound.

The Karnataka High Court has answered in affirmative the question as to whether it would be permissible to issue consolidated/common show cause notice under Sections 73 and 74 of the CGST Act covering multiple financial years or multiple tax periods. The Division Bench of the Court in Commissioner v. Chimney Hills Education Society observed the following: