Retention of seized property survives where recorded reasons support proceeds of crime, while stayed investigation periods are excluded from limitatio...
Specified income of Baddi Barotiwala Nalagarh Development Authority receives conditional tax exemption, retrospectively covering its designated assess...
Specified development authority income receives retrospective tax exemption, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and return-...
Unified Brand India framework introduces voluntary Trust Mark certification and funding support for export branding, packaging and global promotional ...
Origin Declaration authentication governs preferential tariff claims under India-UK CETA, requiring a validated reference number before import clearan...
Separate assessment orders for different years remain valid when distinct notices and hearing opportunities prevent prejudice from combined proceeding...
The court held that the petitioner was denied the principles of natural justice by not being given a reasonable opportunity to contest the tax demand on merits regarding the difference between GSTR 3B and GSTR 1, and the RCM liability mismatch. The petitioner provided proof of payment for the GSTR 3B and GSTR 1 difference, and substantiated the RCM liability mismatch as an inadvertent error through GSTR 3B returns, securing the revenue interest. The impugned order relating to RCM liability mismatch was set aside, and the matter was remanded for reconsideration by the respondent authority. The petitioner was directed to submit a reply to the show cause notice within 15 days. The petition was disposed of.
The court held that the petitioner was denied the principles of natural justice by not being given a reasonable opportunity to contest the tax demand on merits regarding the difference between GSTR 3B and GSTR 1, and the RCM liability mismatch. The petitioner provided proof of payment for the GSTR 3B and GSTR 1 difference, and substantiated the RCM liability mismatch as an inadvertent error through GSTR 3B returns, securing the revenue interest. The impugned order relating to RCM liability mismatch was set aside, and the matter was remanded for reconsideration by the respondent authority. The petitioner was directed to submit a reply to the show cause notice within 15 days. The petition was disposed of.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.