Pre-existing operational debt disputes require genuine evidence, while undirected running-account payments may be appropriated on a first-in-first-out...
Agency in CNG distribution makes outlet operators commission agents, rendering taxable Business Auxiliary Service rather than purchasing goods for res...
Composite inpatient healthcare supply may retain exemption despite MRP medicine billing, while separate taxable sale characterisation remains disputed...
The High Court partly allowed the challenge to the assessment order passed by the second respondent for the Assessment Year 2017-2018. The Court quashed the impugned Assessment Order for violating principles of natural justice and lack of jurisdiction. It remitted the case to the respondents to pass a fresh order, subject to conditions: the petitioner shall deposit 10% of the disputed tax of Rs. 31,56,386/- within six weeks, and file a detailed reply to the quashed Assessment Order, treated as an addendum to the Show Cause Notice dated 11.02.2021, within thirty days. The petition was disposed of accordingly.
The High Court partly allowed the challenge to the assessment order passed by the second respondent for the Assessment Year 2017-2018. The Court quashed the impugned Assessment Order for violating principles of natural justice and lack of jurisdiction. It remitted the case to the respondents to pass a fresh order, subject to conditions: the petitioner shall deposit 10% of the disputed tax of Rs. 31,56,386/- within six weeks, and file a detailed reply to the quashed Assessment Order, treated as an addendum to the Show Cause Notice dated 11.02.2021, within thirty days. The petition was disposed of accordingly.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.