Pre-existing operational debt disputes require genuine evidence, while undirected running-account payments may be appropriated on a first-in-first-out...
Agency in CNG distribution makes outlet operators commission agents, rendering taxable Business Auxiliary Service rather than purchasing goods for res...
Composite inpatient healthcare supply may retain exemption despite MRP medicine billing, while separate taxable sale characterisation remains disputed...
Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) was imposed in violation of principles of natural justice by not granting reasonable opportunity to the petitioner. The ITAT passed orders on 09.01.2024 and 10.01.2024, but the respondent remained inactive for nearly five months. At the eleventh hour, on 19.07.2024, the respondent issued notice quantifying the penalty amount and calling upon the petitioner to pay, without providing adequate time for submitting contentions and documents despite requests. The respondent proceeded to pass orders on 30.07.2024 rejecting submissions and on 31.07.2024 imposing penalty u/s 271(1)(c), in violation of principles of natural justice. The High Court set aside the impugned orders on this ground.
Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) was imposed in violation of principles of natural justice by not granting reasonable opportunity to the petitioner. The ITAT passed orders on 09.01.2024 and 10.01.2024, but the respondent remained inactive for nearly five months. At the eleventh hour, on 19.07.2024, the respondent issued notice quantifying the penalty amount and calling upon the petitioner to pay, without providing adequate time for submitting contentions and documents despite requests. The respondent proceeded to pass orders on 30.07.2024 rejecting submissions and on 31.07.2024 imposing penalty u/s 271(1)(c), in violation of principles of natural justice. The High Court set aside the impugned orders on this ground.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
