Independent show-cause notices remain separate proceedings, while customs adjudication challenges should ordinarily follow the statutory appellate rem...
Institutional incapacity in customs settlement proceedings excludes non-functional quorum periods from statutory disposal timelines, preventing automa...
Interactive touchscreen panels with integrated computing functions fall under automatic data-processing machines rather than display monitors for cust...
Ex parte injunction service requirements were substantially met, while civil recovery and SFIO investigation into provident fund defalcation continued...
Enforcement of resolution-plan directions continues without a Supreme Court stay, preventing suspension of redistribution and escrowed-fund distributi...
Third-party ownership claims over attached property require Special Court adjudication where purchasers lack registered sale deeds and bona fides rema...
Pure-agent reimbursements in clearing and forwarding services are excluded from taxable value when qualifying third-party payments are properly record...
Customs relief for Strait of Hormuz maritime disruptions remains available, with existing conditions continuing unchanged through the extended validit...
Page of 4792
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
221 to 240 of 95833 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Judicial review of an assessment order was conducted due to discrepancies between GSTR 1 and GSTR 3B returns. The petitioner's replies were not considered, violating natural justice principles. The High Court held the order unsustainable as the petitioner's replies were not taken into account while recording conclusions. Consequently, the impugned order was set aside, and the matter remanded for reconsideration. The respondent was directed to provide a reasonable opportunity, including a personal hearing, to the petitioner and issue a fresh order after considering the petitioner's replies and annexed documents.
Judicial review of an assessment order was conducted due to discrepancies between GSTR 1 and GSTR 3B returns. The petitioner's replies were not considered, violating natural justice principles. The High Court held the order unsustainable as the petitioner's replies were not taken into account while recording conclusions. Consequently, the impugned order was set aside, and the matter remanded for reconsideration. The respondent was directed to provide a reasonable opportunity, including a personal hearing, to the petitioner and issue a fresh order after considering the petitioner's replies and annexed documents.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4792
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
