Online bond platforms may offer overseas-regulated products and tax-specific bonds subject to disclosures, compliance safeguards and revised complianc...
Corporate guarantee valuation permits actual ascertainable commission while barring retroactive application and extended-period penalties for bona fid...
Proper-officer jurisdiction under UPGST penalty provisions upheld; participation on merits prevents bypassing the statutory appellate remedy through w...
Transitioned CENVAT credit may validly satisfy mandatory pre-deposit requirements for legacy service tax appeals through Electronic Credit Ledger debi...
Building-plan sanction charges require statutory authority; unauthorised fees and GST were quashed, while labour cess must follow prescribed collectio...
Pure-agent exclusion fails where hotel booking facilitators receive third-party services themselves, making entire customer consideration taxable as r...
The High Court held that the Additional Director of GST Intelligence was competent to issue the communication demanding payment, rejecting the petitioner's contention that only an Assistant Commissioner could issue such a notice. The court relied on a circular permitting Central Tax Officers of Audit Commissionerates and Directorate General of GST to issue show-cause notices. The impugned communication was not a show-cause notice but merely an intimation to pay up, failing which a show-cause notice u/s 74(1) would be issued, for which the Additional Director was competent. The court found no reason to interfere with the communication and dismissed the petition.
The High Court held that the Additional Director of GST Intelligence was competent to issue the communication demanding payment, rejecting the petitioner's contention that only an Assistant Commissioner could issue such a notice. The court relied on a circular permitting Central Tax Officers of Audit Commissionerates and Directorate General of GST to issue show-cause notices. The impugned communication was not a show-cause notice but merely an intimation to pay up, failing which a show-cause notice u/s 74(1) would be issued, for which the Additional Director was competent. The court found no reason to interfere with the communication and dismissed the petition.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4800
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
