Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
+ Post a Query
Post a New Query
Title :
0/200 char
Description :
Max 0 char
Category :
Delete Reply

Are you sure you want to delete your reply beginning with '' ?

Delete Issue

Are you sure you want to delete your Issue titled: '' ?

Discussion Forum

Back

All Issues

Advanced Search
Reset Filters
Search By:
Search by Text :
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms
Select Date:
FromTo
Category :
OR
Search by Issue ID:
NOTE: If you have inputs in both the fields, then results will be shown for issueId first.
Issue ID :

UNDER SECTION 73 ORDER DROP UNDER SECTION 73/74 AGAINST PAYMENT OF GST AND INTEREST. THEN DEPARTMENT ISSUED NEW NOTICE UNDER SECTION 74 IN DRC01A.

Kairav Shah

Dear Sir,,

MY CLIENT NOTICE UNDER SECTION 73 AND AGAINST SEC 73 NOTICE ORDER DROP UNDER SECTION 73/74 AGAINST PAYMENT OF GST AND INTEREST. THEN DEPARTMENT ISSUED NEW NOTICE UNDER SECTION 74 IN DRC-01A.

GST Dispute: Taxpayer Challenges Repeated Show Cause Notices Alleging Procedural Inconsistency in Input Tax Credit Assessment Here's a concise summary of the discussion forum text:A taxpayer faced a complex GST legal issue involving successive show cause notices under Sections 73 and 74. Initially, a notice was issued under Section 73 for alleged excessive input tax credit, which was subsequently dropped after the taxpayer's response. Later, the department issued a fresh notice under Section 74 for the same matter. Legal experts analyzed the situation, highlighting that reopening proceedings under Section 74 requires explicit evidence of fraud or willful misstatement. A case law from the Allahabad High Court was cited, supporting the argument that once proceedings are dropped under Section 73, they cannot be arbitrarily reopened without establishing fraudulent intent. (AI Summary)
answers
Sort by
+ Add A New Reply
Hide
+ Add A New Reply
Hide
Recent Issues