Development agreements require legal possession or effective enjoyment for capital gains transfer; permissive possession and deferred consideration de...
Prolonged sterilisation of development rights supports capital-gains treatment, while business-income disallowances cannot govern capital-gains comput...
Additional evidence in transfer pricing dispute leads to fresh examination, while tax deductions, TDS credit, fee and refund interest require verifica...
Category II AIF pass-through taxation preserves non-business income character; investment receipts cannot be reclassified without applying recognised ...
HC quashed the impugned order dated 30.12.2023 due to procedural non-compliance with Section 73 of AGST Act, 2017. The authority failed to issue a proper Show Cause Notice as mandated under Section 73(1), instead only serving a Summary Notice in Form GST DRC-01. The court emphasized that compliance with subsections (1) to (8) and (10) to (11) of Section 73, along with Rule 142(1), are prerequisite conditions for validity of orders under Section 73(9). The absence of a proper Show Cause Notice violated principles of natural justice, rendering the tax determination order legally unsustainable. The petition was disposed of in favor of the petitioner.
HC quashed the impugned order dated 30.12.2023 due to procedural non-compliance with Section 73 of AGST Act, 2017. The authority failed to issue a proper Show Cause Notice as mandated under Section 73(1), instead only serving a Summary Notice in Form GST DRC-01. The court emphasized that compliance with subsections (1) to (8) and (10) to (11) of Section 73, along with Rule 142(1), are prerequisite conditions for validity of orders under Section 73(9). The absence of a proper Show Cause Notice violated principles of natural justice, rendering the tax determination order legally unsustainable. The petition was disposed of in favor of the petitioner.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.