Helicopter charter classification requires effective control analysis, while territorial performance, reasoned credit orders and wilful suppression de...
Specified fund definition expands PAN exemption eligibility for registered alternative investment funds and qualifying International Financial Service...
Tax exemption for specified legal-services authority income applies retrospectively, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and...
Approved resolution plans extinguish unsubmitted pre-approval tax claims, preventing later recovery outside the insolvency process and preserving a cl...
The High Court quashed the orders passed by the respondent assessing officer for violating principles of natural justice by not providing an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner, despite the petitioner seeking additional time to file replies to show cause notices. The Court remanded the matters back to the respondent for fresh consideration after setting aside the impugned orders, subject to the petitioner paying 10% of the disputed tax demand for each assessment year within six weeks. The case pertained to discrepancies in Input Tax Credits for multiple assessment years from 2018-19 to 2022-23, wherein show cause notices were issued through an online portal, and the petitioner had filed replies but was denied a personal hearing before passing of final orders.
The High Court quashed the orders passed by the respondent assessing officer for violating principles of natural justice by not providing an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner, despite the petitioner seeking additional time to file replies to show cause notices. The Court remanded the matters back to the respondent for fresh consideration after setting aside the impugned orders, subject to the petitioner paying 10% of the disputed tax demand for each assessment year within six weeks. The case pertained to discrepancies in Input Tax Credits for multiple assessment years from 2018-19 to 2022-23, wherein show cause notices were issued through an online portal, and the petitioner had filed replies but was denied a personal hearing before passing of final orders.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.