Bona fide disclosure requirements govern under-reporting penalties, and post-penalty immunity applications cannot secure available statutory protectio...
Certificate-of-origin verification procedure governs preferential customs benefits; denial without retroactive verification was set aside with consequ...
Disciplinary Committee jurisdiction and mandatory investigation requirements invalidated cancellation of an insolvency professional's registration and...
Retention of seized property survives where recorded reasons support proceeds of crime, while stayed investigation periods are excluded from limitatio...
Specified income of Baddi Barotiwala Nalagarh Development Authority receives conditional tax exemption, retrospectively covering its designated assess...
Page of 4805
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
1221 to 1240 of 96092 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 GST assessment order dated 22.04.2024 for violation of natural justice principles under Section 75(4) of GST Act, 2017. Despite petitioner filing two detailed replies (25.01.2024 and 14.03.2024) to Form GST DRC-01 notice, respondent authority passed final order without granting mandatory personal hearing. The scheduling of hearing dates (03.01.2024 and 11.03.2024) prior to reply submission deadlines (25.01.2024 and 14.03.2024 respectively) was procedurally improper. Matter remanded back to respondent authority for fresh consideration after providing proper hearing opportunity to petitioner in accordance with statutory provisions.
HC quashed GST assessment order dated 22.04.2024 for violation of natural justice principles under Section 75(4) of GST Act, 2017. Despite petitioner filing two detailed replies (25.01.2024 and 14.03.2024) to Form GST DRC-01 notice, respondent authority passed final order without granting mandatory personal hearing. The scheduling of hearing dates (03.01.2024 and 11.03.2024) prior to reply submission deadlines (25.01.2024 and 14.03.2024 respectively) was procedurally improper. Matter remanded back to respondent authority for fresh consideration after providing proper hearing opportunity to petitioner in accordance with statutory provisions.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.