Commercial vehicle depreciation, scientifically determined warranty provisions and exempt-income disallowances were resolved in favour of the taxpayer...
Inherited property sale proceeds require capital-gains treatment where ownership is supported by evidence, not suspicion or unverified signature doubt...
Cross-examination of retracted statements is essential where foundational evidence supports a benami allegation and documented funding explanations re...
Capital-goods exemption covers plant-modernisation accessories, while the import restriction applies only to earlier capital-goods components and spar...
Constitutional judicial review permits challenges to ECIRs and connected money-laundering proceedings where coercive action affects fundamental intere...
The Delhi High Court addressed the issue of the cancellation of GST registration of the petitioner with retrospective effect. The court found that the show cause notice (SCN) lacked specific reasons for rejection, violating principles of natural justice. The court noted that the SCN and the impugned order did not provide any details or reasons for the retrospective cancellation. The court referred to Section 29(2) of the Act, stating that registration cannot be cancelled with retrospective effect mechanically, but only if the proper officer deems it fit to do so. The court modified the impugned order, stating that the registration shall be treated as cancelled with effect from the date when the petitioner filed an application seeking cancellation. As the petitioner no longer sought to carry on business or maintain the registration, the petition was disposed of.
The Delhi High Court addressed the issue of the cancellation of GST registration of the petitioner with retrospective effect. The court found that the show cause notice (SCN) lacked specific reasons for rejection, violating principles of natural justice. The court noted that the SCN and the impugned order did not provide any details or reasons for the retrospective cancellation. The court referred to Section 29(2) of the Act, stating that registration cannot be cancelled with retrospective effect mechanically, but only if the proper officer deems it fit to do so. The court modified the impugned order, stating that the registration shall be treated as cancelled with effect from the date when the petitioner filed an application seeking cancellation. As the petitioner no longer sought to carry on business or maintain the registration, the petition was disposed of.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4780
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
