Rectification of mistake remains limited to self-evident record errors, preventing merits review through miscellaneous applications and preserving fin...
Tender creditworthiness conditions may extend to de facto Promoter Directors, with post-participation challenges generally barred absent arbitrariness...
Corporate representation in PMLA summons proceedings permitted through an authorised signatory, subject to directors' continuing cooperation and atten...
Helicopter charter classification requires effective control analysis, while territorial performance, reasoned credit orders and wilful suppression de...
Specified fund definition expands PAN exemption eligibility for registered alternative investment funds and qualifying International Financial Service...
Tax exemption for specified legal-services authority income applies retrospectively, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and...
Page of 4792
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
701 to 720 of 95833 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Violation of the principles of natural justice - The petitioners asserted that since an adverse decision was made against them without a personal hearing, it was in contravention of Section 75(4) of the CGST/MGST Act. - The petitioners, a private company, challenged the order on the grounds that they were not afforded a personal hearing despite requesting one and that the discrepancies alleged against them were unsubstantiated. - Since the petitioners had requested a personal hearing in their reply, the failure of Respondent No. 3 to provide one was deemed a violation of the law. - Matter restored back.
Violation of the principles of natural justice - The petitioners asserted that since an adverse decision was made against them without a personal hearing, it was in contravention of Section 75(4) of the CGST/MGST Act. - The petitioners, a private company, challenged the order on the grounds that they were not afforded a personal hearing despite requesting one and that the discrepancies alleged against them were unsubstantiated. - Since the petitioners had requested a personal hearing in their reply, the failure of Respondent No. 3 to provide one was deemed a violation of the law. - Matter restored back.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4792
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
