Independent show-cause notices remain separate proceedings, while customs adjudication challenges should ordinarily follow the statutory appellate rem...
Institutional incapacity in customs settlement proceedings excludes non-functional quorum periods from statutory disposal timelines, preventing automa...
Interactive touchscreen panels with integrated computing functions fall under automatic data-processing machines rather than display monitors for cust...
Ex parte injunction service requirements were substantially met, while civil recovery and SFIO investigation into provident fund defalcation continued...
Enforcement of resolution-plan directions continues without a Supreme Court stay, preventing suspension of redistribution and escrowed-fund distributi...
Third-party ownership claims over attached property require Special Court adjudication where purchasers lack registered sale deeds and bona fides rema...
Pure-agent reimbursements in clearing and forwarding services are excluded from taxable value when qualifying third-party payments are properly record...
Customs relief for Strait of Hormuz maritime disruptions remains available, with existing conditions continuing unchanged through the extended validit...
Page of 4792
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
221 to 240 of 95833 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.
TaxTMI 
of 4792
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
