Online bond platforms may offer overseas-regulated products and tax-specific bonds subject to disclosures, compliance safeguards and revised complianc...
Corporate guarantee valuation permits actual ascertainable commission while barring retroactive application and extended-period penalties for bona fid...
Proper-officer jurisdiction under UPGST penalty provisions upheld; participation on merits prevents bypassing the statutory appellate remedy through w...
Transitioned CENVAT credit may validly satisfy mandatory pre-deposit requirements for legacy service tax appeals through Electronic Credit Ledger debi...
Building-plan sanction charges require statutory authority; unauthorised fees and GST were quashed, while labour cess must follow prescribed collectio...
Pure-agent exclusion fails where hotel booking facilitators receive third-party services themselves, making entire customer consideration taxable as r...
Conduct of Reassessment Proceedings - Principles of Natural Justice - The High court found that the reassessment proceedings were conducted in great haste, violating the principles of natural justice. The Additional Commissioner granted permission to the Assessing Officer on 18.3.2023, and the notice was issued on 22.3.2023, served on the petitioner on 24.3.2023, with the reassessment order passed on 28.3.2023. The court noted that the petitioner was not given a reasonable opportunity to respond, as only two days were provided to respond to the reassessment notice. The court held that such a procedure undermined the trust in the rule of law and was unacceptable.
Conduct of Reassessment Proceedings - Principles of Natural Justice - The High court found that the reassessment proceedings were conducted in great haste, violating the principles of natural justice. The Additional Commissioner granted permission to the Assessing Officer on 18.3.2023, and the notice was issued on 22.3.2023, served on the petitioner on 24.3.2023, with the reassessment order passed on 28.3.2023. The court noted that the petitioner was not given a reasonable opportunity to respond, as only two days were provided to respond to the reassessment notice. The court held that such a procedure undermined the trust in the rule of law and was unacceptable.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4801
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
