Commercial vehicle depreciation, scientifically determined warranty provisions and exempt-income disallowances were resolved in favour of the taxpayer...
Inherited property sale proceeds require capital-gains treatment where ownership is supported by evidence, not suspicion or unverified signature doubt...
Cross-examination of retracted statements is essential where foundational evidence supports a benami allegation and documented funding explanations re...
Capital-goods exemption covers plant-modernisation accessories, while the import restriction applies only to earlier capital-goods components and spar...
Constitutional judicial review permits challenges to ECIRs and connected money-laundering proceedings where coercive action affects fundamental intere...
Uploading GST notices or orders solely in the Common Portal's "View Additional Notices and Orders" tab was not authorised service because the notified portal functions and Rules did not prescribe that tab as a statutory mode of service. Such uploading could not commence the appeal limitation period, particularly where the interface did not prominently disclose communications. E-mail service required transmission of the notice or order itself to the registered e-mail address; an intimation alone was insufficient. Ex parte proceedings based solely on invalid portal service were restored for reply and hearing, while affected appeals could be considered on merits. However, an assessee that replied to and contested a show-cause notice could not later challenge the resulting order solely for defective portal service.
Uploading GST notices or orders solely in the Common Portal's "View Additional Notices and Orders" tab was not authorised service because the notified portal functions and Rules did not prescribe that tab as a statutory mode of service. Such uploading could not commence the appeal limitation period, particularly where the interface did not prominently disclose communications. E-mail service required transmission of the notice or order itself to the registered e-mail address; an intimation alone was insufficient. Ex parte proceedings based solely on invalid portal service were restored for reply and hearing, while affected appeals could be considered on merits. However, an assessee that replied to and contested a show-cause notice could not later challenge the resulting order solely for defective portal service.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4782
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
