Transaction value and connected person treatment in excise valuation: proprietary concerns not inter connected undertakings, relief on valuation and c...
Appointment of Registrars as adjudicating officers under Companies Act reallocates territorial jurisdiction and sets appeal route to Regional Director...
Composite supply of drilling services and site specific chemicals characterised as composite supply; prior advance rulings set aside, tax rate left op...
Cross country pipeline classification and ITC entitlement: pipelines outside factory treated as immovable, ITC disallowed under Section 17 restriction...
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.