Transaction value rejection requires reliable corroboration; refundable VAT is excluded and temporary registration does not defeat new-vehicle exempti...
Appellate jurisdiction remains available where a wrist-worn gold ornament cannot conclusively be characterised as imported baggage at the preliminary ...
Written complaint requirement bars cognizance on police reports for securities offences, while unsupported breach of trust and cheating allegations fa...
Risk-based postal import clearance standardises electronic assessment, document requests, duty realisation and delivery controls at Foreign Post Offic...
Customs Cargo Service Provider appointment extends custodianship to additional terminal land, subject to cargo-control, security and licence condition...
A personal hearing is required before adverse GST adjudication...
Personal hearing requirements in GST adjudication were satisfied by prior opportunities and written submissions; appellate limitation received writ-pendency exclusion.
Contents
Summary
Note
Bookmark
Share
✓ Copied successfully !
Print
Print Options
For full text, please login
Login to TaxTMI
Verification Pending
The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on
A personal hearing is required before adverse GST adjudication where the assessing authority contemplates an adverse decision after considering the taxpayer's representation. The notes state that three hearing opportunities, followed by written final submissions from the authorised representative, satisfied that requirement; no further hearing was necessary merely because the order was issued later. The challenge on that ground remained closed. Statutory appellate recourse was permitted, with the writ-pendency period excluded for computing limitation and the condonable period, while other issues remained open. Refund of tax recovered was declined because the writ was filed after the statutory appeal period had expired.
A personal hearing is required before adverse GST adjudication where the assessing authority contemplates an adverse decision after considering the taxpayer's representation. The notes state that three hearing opportunities, followed by written final submissions from the authorised representative, satisfied that requirement; no further hearing was necessary merely because the order was issued later. The challenge on that ground remained closed. Statutory appellate recourse was permitted, with the writ-pendency period excluded for computing limitation and the condonable period, while other issues remained open. Refund of tax recovered was declined because the writ was filed after the statutory appeal period had expired.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4784
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
