Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the impugned order was liable to be set aside and the matter remanded for fresh consideration on the petitioner producing invoice-wise particulars to show that the transactions were below the e-way bill threshold.
Analysis: The dispute turned on the petitioner's contention that the consolidated demand covered multiple invoice bills and that, if the invoices were broken up, the transactions would fall within the exemption limit for e-way bills. The respondents' stand was that the proceedings could have been dropped had the supporting invoices been produced, but no such documents had been placed before the authority. In these circumstances, the existing order was found unsustainable and further consideration by the authority, after production of the invoices and hearing the petitioner, was warranted.
Conclusion: The impugned order was set aside and the petitioner was directed to produce the invoices and raise the relevant issues before the second respondent, who was required to afford an opportunity of hearing and pass a fresh order.
Final Conclusion: The writ petition succeeded, with the assessment proceedings sent back for reconsideration after the petitioner's supporting documents are produced and heard.
Ratio Decidendi: Where the liability depends on invoice-wise verification and the assessee is afforded an opportunity to substantiate the claim, an order made without such consideration may be set aside and the matter remitted for fresh decision after hearing.