Permanent establishment tests: independent subsidiary premises and principal-to-principal dealings did not create Indian taxability for offshore suppl...
Valuation Officer estimates govern property-value additions once statutory valuation is invoked, requiring fresh consideration of objections and compa...
Waiver of written show-cause notice may prevent a later procedural challenge after participation in customs adjudication, preserving statutory appella...
Retrospective invalidity of ocean-freight IGST supports refunds despite non-party status and prior credit utilisation, subject to authorised appeal gr...
Additional evidence in departmental appeals may include show-cause-notice material without introducing a new case where it merely corroborates existin...
Reasoned rectification orders require consideration of expenditure disclosed in income-tax returns, preventing revision based on incomplete income com...
Modified returns after business reorganisations cannot trigger fresh scrutiny once the original assessment was complete, invalidating related transfer...
Page of 4891
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
21 to 40 of 97820 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Validity of assessment order - SCN as also the assessment order have not been signed by the 2nd respondent either digitally or physically - The High court examined similar cases and legal provisions, concluding that unsigned orders are legally ineffective. Sections 160 and 169 of the CGST Act do not justify the absence of signatures. Previous judgments from other high courts supported the requirement of signatures for authentication. Consequently, the court set aside/quashed the challenged documents, affirming that the lack of signatures rendered them legally unsustainable.
Validity of assessment order - SCN as also the assessment order have not been signed by the 2nd respondent either digitally or physically - The High court examined similar cases and legal provisions, concluding that unsigned orders are legally ineffective. Sections 160 and 169 of the CGST Act do not justify the absence of signatures. Previous judgments from other high courts supported the requirement of signatures for authentication. Consequently, the court set aside/quashed the challenged documents, affirming that the lack of signatures rendered them legally unsustainable.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4891 
