Arrest safeguards and transit remand requirements invalidated detention following inter-State transfer without communicated grounds or magistrate auth...
Arrest safeguards require disclosed grounds, relative intimation and transit remand, while duplicate prosecution under the CGST framework is unsustain...
Document Identification Number defects can invalidate GST assessments, with delayed challenges entertained conditionally where patent irregularities e...
Windmill commissioning evidence supported higher depreciation where grid connection and electricity generation proved operational use before the relev...
Pharmaceutical promotion and transfer-pricing comparability principles limited disallowances, while uncorroborated search allegations and unsupported ...
Business expenditure substantiation supports scrap credits, statutory payments and expense claims, while depreciation requires proof of actual busines...
Writ interference with a GST show cause notice and adjudication order was declined because an efficacious statutory appeal was available and no breach of natural justice or statutory provision was shown. The petitioner had participated in the proceedings, filed replies, and had not raised before adjudication the plea that only part of the notice was served. The reference to 2021 in the relied-upon documents was accepted as an inadvertent typographical error, as the demand related to October 2018 to November 2019. The order in original covered the relevant periods and showed that the petitioner had sufficient opportunity of hearing; the disputed factual issues were left to the appellate authority.
Writ interference with a GST show cause notice and adjudication order was declined because an efficacious statutory appeal was available and no breach of natural justice or statutory provision was shown. The petitioner had participated in the proceedings, filed replies, and had not raised before adjudication the plea that only part of the notice was served. The reference to 2021 in the relied-upon documents was accepted as an inadvertent typographical error, as the demand related to October 2018 to November 2019. The order in original covered the relevant periods and showed that the petitioner had sufficient opportunity of hearing; the disputed factual issues were left to the appellate authority.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4792
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
