Corporate guarantee valuation permits actual ascertainable commission while barring retroactive application and extended-period penalties for bona fid...
Proper-officer jurisdiction under UPGST penalty provisions upheld; participation on merits prevents bypassing the statutory appellate remedy through w...
Transitioned CENVAT credit may validly satisfy mandatory pre-deposit requirements for legacy service tax appeals through Electronic Credit Ledger debi...
Building-plan sanction charges require statutory authority; unauthorised fees and GST were quashed, while labour cess must follow prescribed collectio...
Pure-agent exclusion fails where hotel booking facilitators receive third-party services themselves, making entire customer consideration taxable as r...
Transfer pricing requires evidence for AMP transactions, functionally reliable comparables, and appropriate aggregation or Berry Ratio benchmarking me...
Revisionary jurisdiction cannot reopen share capital assessments where adequate inquiry supports a permissible view and no independent error is establ...
Page of 4794
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
1 to 20 of 95872 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
HC quashed the GST registration cancellation order dated 06.04.2021 issued by Asst Commissioner. The order lacked mandatory reasoning for cancellation, violating fundamental principles of administrative law and Art 14 of Constitution. Though petitioner's appeal was dismissed for limitation under s.107(4) UPGST Act, doctrine of merger was found inapplicable. Court emphasized that reasons constitute the essence of judicial and administrative orders, without which such orders cannot be legally sustained. The registration cancellation, being a severe action, required clear justification. The impugned order was set aside for lack of application of mind and absence of reasoning.
HC quashed the GST registration cancellation order dated 06.04.2021 issued by Asst Commissioner. The order lacked mandatory reasoning for cancellation, violating fundamental principles of administrative law and Art 14 of Constitution. Though petitioner's appeal was dismissed for limitation under s.107(4) UPGST Act, doctrine of merger was found inapplicable. Court emphasized that reasons constitute the essence of judicial and administrative orders, without which such orders cannot be legally sustained. The registration cancellation, being a severe action, required clear justification. The impugned order was set aside for lack of application of mind and absence of reasoning.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.