Reassessment disclosure requirements permit stated reasons without revealing information sources, but prior-taxation claims require full examination b...
Independent assessment discretion and corroborated electronic evidence determine validity of on-money additions and undisclosed-consideration assessme...
Service of notice and contractual debt acknowledgment preserved insolvency admission against a corporate guarantor despite limitation and natural just...
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 
of 4830 
Join Channel 
