Omitted specified domestic transaction provision invalidates related-party expenditure transfer-pricing references and assessments based on consequent...
Preventive suspension requires an immediate continuing threat and cannot become indefinite without inquiry, fresh evidence, or proportionate safeguard...
The case before the Andhra Pradesh High Court involved a challenge to the cancellation of GST registration due to delay in filing a writ petition and alleged violation of natural justice principles. The court held that the retrospective effect of the impugned order was valid. Referring to a Supreme Court decision, it clarified that claims for refund must adhere to specific rules and limitations. The court found no violation of natural justice as the petitioner failed to respond to a show cause notice. It also determined that no hearing opportunity was required before the suspension of registration. Ultimately, the petition was dismissed.
The case before the Andhra Pradesh High Court involved a challenge to the cancellation of GST registration due to delay in filing a writ petition and alleged violation of natural justice principles. The court held that the retrospective effect of the impugned order was valid. Referring to a Supreme Court decision, it clarified that claims for refund must adhere to specific rules and limitations. The court found no violation of natural justice as the petitioner failed to respond to a show cause notice. It also determined that no hearing opportunity was required before the suspension of registration. Ultimately, the petition was dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.