Revisional jurisdiction over export quota premium deductions requires both error and Revenue prejudice; a permissible assessment view cannot be displa...
Final benami adjudication bars contradictory tax-evasion prosecution where settlement findings confirm full disclosure and cooperation without conceal...
Faceless assessment and registration procedures are updated through electronic communication, revised recovery rules, extended deadlines, and replacem...
Risk-based selective vessel boarding requires accurate declarations and preserves master and agent liability where physical inspections are not select...
In a High Court case, the petitioner challenged an order due to inability to respond to show cause notice or participate in proceedings because of cancer diagnosis. Discrepancy in GSTR 3B returns and auto-populated GSTR 2A noted. Court found tax proposal confirmed as petitioner didn't respond or attend hearing. Court held justice requires giving petitioner chance, so remand ordered with condition to remit 10% of disputed tax demand within two weeks. Impugned order set aside, matter remanded for reconsideration, and petition disposed of.
In a High Court case, the petitioner challenged an order due to inability to respond to show cause notice or participate in proceedings because of cancer diagnosis. Discrepancy in GSTR 3B returns and auto-populated GSTR 2A noted. Court found tax proposal confirmed as petitioner didn't respond or attend hearing. Court held justice requires giving petitioner chance, so remand ordered with condition to remit 10% of disputed tax demand within two weeks. Impugned order set aside, matter remanded for reconsideration, and petition disposed of.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4884 
