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 impugned show cause notice (SCN) did not contain any...
GST registration cancellation order & SCN set aside due to vague allegations violating natural justice. Cryptic notice can't be basis for cancellation.
Contents
Summary
Note
Bookmark
Share
✓ Copied successfully !
Print
Print Options
For full text, please login
Login to TaxTMI
Verification Pending
The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on
The impugned show cause notice (SCN) did not contain any specific allegations against the petitioner regarding issuance of invoices without supply of goods, merely referring to Rule 21(g) and stating violation of Rule 86B. The SCN lacked details of invoices allegedly not covered by supply of goods, violating principles of natural justice as the noticee could not respond to vague allegations. The impugned order cancelling GST registration with retrospective effect went beyond the scope of the SCN. The High Court set aside the cancellation order and SCN, directing restoration of the petitioner's GST registration forthwith, as the cryptic allegations could not be the basis for cancellation.
The impugned show cause notice (SCN) did not contain any specific allegations against the petitioner regarding issuance of invoices without supply of goods, merely referring to Rule 21(g) and stating violation of Rule 86B. The SCN lacked details of invoices allegedly not covered by supply of goods, violating principles of natural justice as the noticee could not respond to vague allegations. The impugned order cancelling GST registration with retrospective effect went beyond the scope of the SCN. The High Court set aside the cancellation order and SCN, directing restoration of the petitioner's GST registration forthwith, as the cryptic allegations could not be the basis for cancellation.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.