Ratification of resignation acceptance validates separation retrospectively, while withdrawal may be refused through reasoned administrative discretio...
Nature-dependent electricity contracts receive new Ind AS accounting, hedge designation, transition and financial-statement disclosure requirements fr...
Alternative GST remedy permitted protective writ intervention for ex parte adjudication, preserving independent appellate review of input tax credit d...
Assessment against deceased sole proprietor requires proceedings against the legal representative, rendering prior assessment and appellate orders inv...
Residential waste collection classification under SAC 999423 defeats composite-supply exemption where facilitating goods are not transferred to the lo...
Page of 4800
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
161 to 180 of 96000 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
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.