Faceless reassessment jurisdiction turned on retrospective AO definition, with later faceless-assessment changes treated as clarificatory and procedur...
Page of 4807
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
2161 to 2180 of 96140 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The High Court found a violation of natural justice as the petitioner was not given a fair chance to contest a tax demand due to a mismatch between GSTR 3B return and GSTR 1 statement. The tax liability arose from this discrepancy. The petitioner's counsel provided evidence of GST computation errors. The court noted the tax proposal was confirmed due to lack of response to show cause notice. To ensure justice, the court set aside the order and remanded the matter for reconsideration. The petitioner can reply to the notice within two weeks. The petition was disposed of by remand.
The High Court found a violation of natural justice as the petitioner was not given a fair chance to contest a tax demand due to a mismatch between GSTR 3B return and GSTR 1 statement. The tax liability arose from this discrepancy. The petitioner's counsel provided evidence of GST computation errors. The court noted the tax proposal was confirmed due to lack of response to show cause notice. To ensure justice, the court set aside the order and remanded the matter for reconsideration. The petitioner can reply to the notice within two weeks. The petition was disposed of by remand.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.