Specialized Investment Fund distribution now requires dedicated certification, while transitional recognition preserves existing qualified distributor...
Overlapping GST proceedings require Central and State authorities to designate one competent authority for coordinated adjudication of the same matter...
Composite healthcare supplies retain exemption when patient care is the contract's essential character, despite payment through an implementing agency...
Receipt of immovable property requires actual possession or enjoyment; redevelopment allotments exchanged for tenancy rights fall outside deemed incom...
A High Court held that confiscation proceedings under Section 130 read with Section 122 of the Act, 2017 cannot be initiated merely for an alleged violation of Section 35 without prior determination of tax liability under Sections 73 or 74. Because the show cause notice was issued without satisfying that jurisdictional requirement, it was held to be without jurisdiction. Interference at the notice stage was therefore justified, and the show cause notice and consequential confiscation order were quashed, with liberty to the department to proceed afresh in accordance with law.
A High Court held that confiscation proceedings under Section 130 read with Section 122 of the Act, 2017 cannot be initiated merely for an alleged violation of Section 35 without prior determination of tax liability under Sections 73 or 74. Because the show cause notice was issued without satisfying that jurisdictional requirement, it was held to be without jurisdiction. Interference at the notice stage was therefore justified, and the show cause notice and consequential confiscation order were quashed, with liberty to the department to proceed afresh in accordance with law.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4809 
Join Channel 
