Charitable trust income application permits verified capital expenditure but rejects deferred pre-operative claims and requires reconsideration of con...
Reinsurance premium deductions require established regulatory breaches, while independently acquired software qualifies within the computer depreciati...
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...
Page of 4801
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
861 to 880 of 96001 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The Delhi High Court addressed a case involving a violation of principles of natural justice due to an ex-parte demand created under section 73 of the CGST Act, 2017. The petitioner failed to respond to a Show Cause Notice regarding excess claim of Input Tax Credit (ITC) and scrutiny of ITC availed. The court held that the impugned order was solely based on the lack of reply to the Show Cause Notice. As there was no Annexure-B provided by the Respondents, the court granted the petitioner an opportunity to respond to the Notice. Consequently, the order dated 12.12.2023 was set aside, and the Show Cause Notice was remitted to the Proper Officer for re-adjudication. The petition was disposed of through remand.
The Delhi High Court addressed a case involving a violation of principles of natural justice due to an ex-parte demand created under section 73 of the CGST Act, 2017. The petitioner failed to respond to a Show Cause Notice regarding excess claim of Input Tax Credit (ITC) and scrutiny of ITC availed. The court held that the impugned order was solely based on the lack of reply to the Show Cause Notice. As there was no Annexure-B provided by the Respondents, the court granted the petitioner an opportunity to respond to the Notice. Consequently, the order dated 12.12.2023 was set aside, and the Show Cause Notice was remitted to the Proper Officer for re-adjudication. The petition was disposed of through remand.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.