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 ...
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.