Reassessment jurisdiction fails where unverified portal information is aggregated without examining the taxpayer's explanation or relevance of entries...
Statutory sanction for delayed reassessment requires approval from the prescribed authority; approval by an inferior authority invalidates jurisdictio...
Transfer pricing margin adjustments require matching treatment of non-operating income and related costs, with comparability issues reconsidered on ev...
Preliminary-expense amortisation and MAT exempt-income adjustments prevailed, while trademark costs and managerial remuneration require fresh verifica...
Export valuation requires contemporaneous evidence; unrelated invoices cannot prove overvaluation, and dual penalties on firm and partner are impermis...
Ratification of resignation acceptance validates separation retrospectively, while withdrawal may be refused through reasoned administrative discretio...
Nature-dependent electricity contracts receive new Ind AS accounting, hedge designation, transition and financial-statement disclosure requirements fr...
Page of 4805
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
241 to 260 of 96092 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Rectification of an ex parte GST adjudication order cannot become a merits review through another ex parte order. Where the authority omitted to consider the assessee's replies, the defect went to the root of adjudication and required recall of the original order followed by a fresh personal hearing. Although the authority could correct an apparent error on its own motion and exercise inherent procedural-review power to cure denial of hearing, it could not sustain a revised demand without considering the replies and hearing the assessee. The subsequent ex parte rectification order was set aside and the matter remitted for fresh adjudication after granting an opportunity of hearing.
Rectification of an ex parte GST adjudication order cannot become a merits review through another ex parte order. Where the authority omitted to consider the assessee's replies, the defect went to the root of adjudication and required recall of the original order followed by a fresh personal hearing. Although the authority could correct an apparent error on its own motion and exercise inherent procedural-review power to cure denial of hearing, it could not sustain a revised demand without considering the replies and hearing the assessee. The subsequent ex parte rectification order was set aside and the matter remitted for fresh adjudication after granting an opportunity of hearing.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.