Reassessment jurisdiction fails where unverified portal information is aggregated without examining the taxpayer's explanation or relevance of entries...
Statutory sanction for delayed reassessment requires approval from the prescribed authority; approval by an inferior authority invalidates jurisdictio...
Transfer pricing margin adjustments require matching treatment of non-operating income and related costs, with comparability issues reconsidered on ev...
Preliminary-expense amortisation and MAT exempt-income adjustments prevailed, while trademark costs and managerial remuneration require fresh verifica...
Export valuation requires contemporaneous evidence; unrelated invoices cannot prove overvaluation, and dual penalties on firm and partner are impermis...
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...
Page of 4805
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
241 to 260 of 96092 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The High Court quashed the summary order issued under the GST Act without a detailed order, finding it a violation of principles of natural justice. The court observed that the summary order merely mentioned the order number, tax period, financial year, issues involved, description of goods, and demand details, but lacked a detailed order supporting it. Consequently, the court set aside the summary order, the consequent recovery action, and the attachment of the petitioner's bank accounts. The respondents were directed to pass an appropriate order for lifting the attachment of the petitioner's bank accounts forthwith.
The High Court quashed the summary order issued under the GST Act without a detailed order, finding it a violation of principles of natural justice. The court observed that the summary order merely mentioned the order number, tax period, financial year, issues involved, description of goods, and demand details, but lacked a detailed order supporting it. Consequently, the court set aside the summary order, the consequent recovery action, and the attachment of the petitioner's bank accounts. The respondents were directed to pass an appropriate order for lifting the attachment of the petitioner's bank accounts forthwith.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.