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...
HC held that the SCN issued under Section 73 of CGST Act was procedurally deficient as it failed to adequately address the assessee's reply to the final audit report regarding GSTR-9 and GSTR-1 mismatch. The Court emphasized that a valid SCN must specifically detail the authority's prima facie findings and reasoning for rejecting the assessee's explanations. Since the adjudicating authority merely acknowledged but did not analyze the assessee's submissions, the notice was deemed vague and prejudicial to the assessee's right of defense. Matter remanded for issuance of fresh SCN with proper reasoning addressing the assessee's October 21, 2024 reply and supporting documentation.
HC held that the SCN issued under Section 73 of CGST Act was procedurally deficient as it failed to adequately address the assessee's reply to the final audit report regarding GSTR-9 and GSTR-1 mismatch. The Court emphasized that a valid SCN must specifically detail the authority's prima facie findings and reasoning for rejecting the assessee's explanations. Since the adjudicating authority merely acknowledged but did not analyze the assessee's submissions, the notice was deemed vague and prejudicial to the assessee's right of defense. Matter remanded for issuance of fresh SCN with proper reasoning addressing the assessee's October 21, 2024 reply and supporting documentation.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.