Business expenditure deduction requires proof of genuine commission payments and commercial allowability; turnover growth alone cannot validate the cl...
Article 8 treaty coverage excluded third-party airline support services, while documented demonetisation cash receipts remained accepted business inco...
Functional comparability under TNMM requires highway contract benchmarks to reflect operation, maintenance and transfer activities, requiring fresh be...
The petitioner contested a demand raised against them u/s 74 of the GST Act for a substantial amount, claiming that the order was passed without affording them an opportunity of personal hearing, thus violating their rights under the principles of natural justice. - The High Court referred to previous judgments, including one stating that under Section 75(4) of the GST Act, it is mandatory to grant a personal hearing where any adverse decision is contemplated against the person chargeable with tax or penalty, even without a specific request for such hearing. The Court held that the authority must afford an opportunity of personal hearing before passing any adverse order, as clarified in previous judgments.
The petitioner contested a demand raised against them u/s 74 of the GST Act for a substantial amount, claiming that the order was passed without affording them an opportunity of personal hearing, thus violating their rights under the principles of natural justice. - The High Court referred to previous judgments, including one stating that under Section 75(4) of the GST Act, it is mandatory to grant a personal hearing where any adverse decision is contemplated against the person chargeable with tax or penalty, even without a specific request for such hearing. The Court held that the authority must afford an opportunity of personal hearing before passing any adverse order, as clarified in previous judgments.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4809 
Join Channel 
