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 High Court quashed the order invoking Rule 86A for blocking the Electronic Credit Ledger (ECL) of the petitioner under the CGST/SGST Rules, 2017. The impugned order lacked independent or cogent reasons and relied on reports of enforcement authorities, which is impermissible. Crucially, no pre-decisional hearing was granted, violating principles of natural justice. The order erroneously described the supplier as non-existent or not conducting business, despite the supplier obtaining registration and the transaction occurring before cancellation of registration. The court held that the order failed to provide valid reasons for blocking the ECL, thereby warranting its quashing.
The High Court quashed the order invoking Rule 86A for blocking the Electronic Credit Ledger (ECL) of the petitioner under the CGST/SGST Rules, 2017. The impugned order lacked independent or cogent reasons and relied on reports of enforcement authorities, which is impermissible. Crucially, no pre-decisional hearing was granted, violating principles of natural justice. The order erroneously described the supplier as non-existent or not conducting business, despite the supplier obtaining registration and the transaction occurring before cancellation of registration. The court held that the order failed to provide valid reasons for blocking the ECL, thereby warranting its quashing.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.