Article 8 treaty coverage excluded third-party airline support services, while documented demonetisation cash receipts remained accepted business inco...
Functional comparability under TNMM requires highway contract benchmarks to reflect operation, maintenance and transfer activities, requiring fresh be...
Objective characteristics govern magnesium bis-glycinate chelate classification as an amino-acid coordination compound, not a food preparation or anti...
Independent professional certification requires pleaded knowledge or complicity for criminal liability; untimely complaints remain barred by limitatio...
GST adjudication conducted ex parte without fixing the date, time or venue for personal hearing violated the mandatory hearing requirement under Section 75(4) and the principles of natural justice. The Court held that the right to an oral hearing is independent of filing a written reply, and mere non-participation in response to the notice did not amount to waiver. The assessment order was therefore vitiated, and the appellate orders rejecting the challenge on limitation could not stand. The impugned orders were set aside and the matter was remitted to the proper officer for fresh adjudication after due notice and opportunity of hearing.
GST adjudication conducted ex parte without fixing the date, time or venue for personal hearing violated the mandatory hearing requirement under Section 75(4) and the principles of natural justice. The Court held that the right to an oral hearing is independent of filing a written reply, and mere non-participation in response to the notice did not amount to waiver. The assessment order was therefore vitiated, and the appellate orders rejecting the challenge on limitation could not stand. The impugned orders were set aside and the matter was remitted to the proper officer for fresh adjudication after due notice and opportunity of hearing.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.