Hai
A Show cause notice was issued on us by invoking sec. 73 (1) of the FA, 1994 (alleging fraud, etc) and ADC confirmed the demand as per the same section. In the appeal stage (comm Appeals), we had argued that sec. 73 (1) can not be rightly invoked against us. The personal hearing at the Commissioner (A) was also completed. Now the ADC has issued a 'corrigendum to the OIO, stating that the demand is confirmed as per section 73(2). My query is that such an action by the ADC is sustainable at this stage? Also, what is the remedy available to us at this stage? Can any of the practicing members can cite some case laws to support us?
Corrigendum Issued Changing Section from 73(1) to 73(2) Deemed Impermissible; Challenge Advised for Adjudication Order A show cause notice was issued under Section 73(1) of the Finance Act, 1994, alleging fraud. The demand was confirmed by the Additional Deputy Commissioner (ADC). During the appeal, it was argued that Section 73(1) was incorrectly applied. After a personal hearing, the ADC issued a corrigendum confirming the demand under Section 73(2). The query concerns the sustainability of this action and available remedies. Responses suggest that issuing a corrigendum to change the section cited in the original order is not permissible and recommend challenging the adjudication order before the appropriate authority. (AI Summary)
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
