Pre-amendment reassessment limitation bars late notices under the preserved regime, invalidating consequential reassessment for affected earlier asses...
Cash-sales explanations for bank deposits require documentary reconciliation; reassessment notice survived where effective response time was available...
Functional comparability in transfer pricing prevents ad hoc arm's length adjustments where functions, assets, risks and reliable comparables are unes...
Contingency expenses, exempt-income disallowance, and royalty benchmarking: unsupported adjustments were deleted under consistent accounting and trans...
Cancellation of GST registration of the petitioner - Rule 22 (3) of CER - The court examines the validity of the show cause notice issued by the respondent and considers the petitioner's argument regarding the ex-parte physical verification. It emphasizes the need for adherence to Rule 25 of the Central Goods and Service Tax Rules, 2017, regarding the conduct of such verifications. - The court interprets Rule 22(3) of the Rules, which stipulates a timeframe for issuing an order in response to a show cause notice. It concludes that the provision is directory rather than mandatory, as there are no specified consequences for non-compliance within the stipulated timeframe.
Cancellation of GST registration of the petitioner - Rule 22 (3) of CER - The court examines the validity of the show cause notice issued by the respondent and considers the petitioner's argument regarding the ex-parte physical verification. It emphasizes the need for adherence to Rule 25 of the Central Goods and Service Tax Rules, 2017, regarding the conduct of such verifications. - The court interprets Rule 22(3) of the Rules, which stipulates a timeframe for issuing an order in response to a show cause notice. It concludes that the provision is directory rather than mandatory, as there are no specified consequences for non-compliance within the stipulated timeframe.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.