Fraudulent trading requires cogent evidence of intent to defraud; ordinary-course payments protected, except post-insolvency withdrawals must be resto...
Religious purpose exclusion versus charitable purpose: non overriding religious objects do not attract Explanation 3, registration directed under sect...
Search-assessment proviso jurisdiction, time-barred valuation reports, and denial of cross-examination vitiate valuation-based and confession-based ad...
Section 74(5) of the GST law read with Rule 142(1A) confers a statutory pre-show-cause opportunity to settle the proposed demand by paying tax, interest and reduced penalty, and the Rule must be read consistently with that right. The High Court held that use of the word "may" in Rule 142(1A) cannot defeat the mandatory effect of the principal legislation. Non-issuance of DRC-01A does not by itself make DRC-01 without jurisdiction, but where the noticee invokes the statutory benefit in reply, the assessee cannot be denied the option to discharge the demand. As the petitioner raised that plea, the adjudication was to stand satisfied on payment within the time granted.
Section 74(5) of the GST law read with Rule 142(1A) confers a statutory pre-show-cause opportunity to settle the proposed demand by paying tax, interest and reduced penalty, and the Rule must be read consistently with that right. The High Court held that use of the word "may" in Rule 142(1A) cannot defeat the mandatory effect of the principal legislation. Non-issuance of DRC-01A does not by itself make DRC-01 without jurisdiction, but where the noticee invokes the statutory benefit in reply, the assessee cannot be denied the option to discharge the demand. As the petitioner raised that plea, the adjudication was to stand satisfied on payment within the time granted.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.