Faceless reassessment jurisdiction turned on retrospective AO definition, with later faceless-assessment changes treated as clarificatory and procedur...
Page of 4805
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
2121 to 2140 of 96100 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 held that the petitioner's contention of not having the power to recover amounts during the pendency of an investigation that commenced prior to the issuance of a show cause notice u/ss 67 and 70 is valid. The payments made by the petitioner cannot be considered self-ascertainment u/s 74(5) of the CGST Act, as the element of voluntariness is absent. Since the adjudication is still to conclude and a notice u/s 74(1) has already been issued, the question of going back to the stage of Section 74(5) does not arise. The petition is allowed in part, declaring the recovery of tax from the petitioner as illegal and directing a refund within four weeks, along with applicable interest.
The High Court held that the petitioner's contention of not having the power to recover amounts during the pendency of an investigation that commenced prior to the issuance of a show cause notice u/ss 67 and 70 is valid. The payments made by the petitioner cannot be considered self-ascertainment u/s 74(5) of the CGST Act, as the element of voluntariness is absent. Since the adjudication is still to conclude and a notice u/s 74(1) has already been issued, the question of going back to the stage of Section 74(5) does not arise. The petition is allowed in part, declaring the recovery of tax from the petitioner as illegal and directing a refund within four weeks, along with applicable interest.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
