Political contribution deductions require genuine transactions; banking records and party registration alone cannot defeat evidence of accommodation e...
Post-death GST liability permits fresh proceedings against legal representatives, while discontinued-business recovery remains limited to the inherite...
Non-confirmation of FEMA seizure prevents adjudicators from overriding pending appellate findings on recorded reasons and suspected foreign asset hold...
The HC quashed orders demanding 10% pre-deposit of grant-in-aid as a precondition for considering the petitioner's representation. The Court determined that the demand lacked statutory foundation and was inappropriately imposed at the representation stage rather than appellate stage. The impugned orders were issued without affording the petitioner an opportunity of hearing, violating the principle that no order resulting in civil consequences can be passed without such opportunity. The Court directed authorities to consider the petitioner's representation without requiring any pre-deposit within three months, while abstaining from commenting on the merits of the underlying cancellation order. The petition was allowed.
The HC quashed orders demanding 10% pre-deposit of grant-in-aid as a precondition for considering the petitioner's representation. The Court determined that the demand lacked statutory foundation and was inappropriately imposed at the representation stage rather than appellate stage. The impugned orders were issued without affording the petitioner an opportunity of hearing, violating the principle that no order resulting in civil consequences can be passed without such opportunity. The Court directed authorities to consider the petitioner's representation without requiring any pre-deposit within three months, while abstaining from commenting on the merits of the underlying cancellation order. The petition was allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
