Admissibility of electronic evidence bars undervaluation demands where printouts, retracted statements and no cross-examination leave the case unprove...
Limitation in oppression and mismanagement proceedings: prior knowledge of removal and dilution barred the challenge, with valuation directions upheld...
Insolvency professional agency governance rules amended to add nominee directors, tighten independent director eligibility, and regulate managing dire...
The High Court held that the proceedings initiated u/s 74 of the CGST Act, 2017 were vitiated as the Proper Officer had previously dropped the proceedings u/s 61(2) after finding the reply satisfactory. Initiating proceedings u/s 74 after dropping Section 61 proceedings violated the principles of natural justice. Consequently, the High Court quashed the order dated 14.06.2023 passed u/s 74(1) and the notice dated 21.04.2023 issued u/s 74(1) of the CGST Act.
The High Court held that the proceedings initiated u/s 74 of the CGST Act, 2017 were vitiated as the Proper Officer had previously dropped the proceedings u/s 61(2) after finding the reply satisfactory. Initiating proceedings u/s 74 after dropping Section 61 proceedings violated the principles of natural justice. Consequently, the High Court quashed the order dated 14.06.2023 passed u/s 74(1) and the notice dated 21.04.2023 issued u/s 74(1) of the CGST Act.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.