Charitable trust registration requires a specified-violation notice; settled cash deposits and related-party payments did not justify cancellation or ...
External development charges trigger TDS under section 194C, while disputed administrative payments require factual verification and fresh adjudicatio...
Section 270AA penalty immunity requires identified statutory defaults and a hearing before rejection; reassessment disclosure may constitute under-rep...
Section 80JJAA employee-cost deduction allowed for deployed staff but barred against transfer-pricing income enhancement, with pricing issues remanded...
Transfer-pricing methodology protects commercially genuine associated-enterprise payments, while pre-2016 secondary adjustments and related notional i...
Negative liens over operating assets can constitute international transactions requiring arm's-length pricing reflecting restricted borrowing and expa...
Cross-examination rights in Customs Broker revocation inquiries require witness examination; procedural denial may be cured through fresh adjudication...
The High Court considered the validity of a garnishee order due to a mismatch between the supplier's GSTR 1 statement and the petitioner's GSTR 3B returns. The court found that the petitioner was not given a chance to be heard before the order was issued. As the tax demand was already met from the petitioner's bank account, the revenue interest was secured. The court held that the petitioner should be allowed to contest the tax demand and quashed the impugned order dated 15.09.2023. The matter was remanded for reconsideration, and the petition was disposed of by way of remand.
The High Court considered the validity of a garnishee order due to a mismatch between the supplier's GSTR 1 statement and the petitioner's GSTR 3B returns. The court found that the petitioner was not given a chance to be heard before the order was issued. As the tax demand was already met from the petitioner's bank account, the revenue interest was secured. The court held that the petitioner should be allowed to contest the tax demand and quashed the impugned order dated 15.09.2023. The matter was remanded for reconsideration, and the petition was disposed of by way of remand.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
