Opportunity to respond to jurisdictional reports is mandatory before customs settlement duty enhancement; connected applications require consistent ad...
Specific customs headings for scaffolding components prevail over general classification, invalidating misclassification proceedings and enabling with...
The High Court found that the respondents failed to properly consider the petitioner's contentions regarding the retrospective cancellation of GST registration of its suppliers and the petitioner's claim of having paid taxes on its supplies. The impugned order did not specifically state whether the suppliers had paid taxes for which the petitioner claimed input tax credit. The court deemed the impugned order as lacking reasoning and remanded the matter to the Proper Officer for fresh consideration, disposing of the petition through remand, despite the petitioner having an efficacious appeal remedy available.
The High Court found that the respondents failed to properly consider the petitioner's contentions regarding the retrospective cancellation of GST registration of its suppliers and the petitioner's claim of having paid taxes on its supplies. The impugned order did not specifically state whether the suppliers had paid taxes for which the petitioner claimed input tax credit. The court deemed the impugned order as lacking reasoning and remanded the matter to the Proper Officer for fresh consideration, disposing of the petition through remand, despite the petitioner having an efficacious appeal remedy available.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4782
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
