Dispute Resolution Panel objections must reach both prescribed forums; otherwise assessment may proceed and statutory appeal remains the proper remedy...
Political contribution deductions require recipient party compliance with contribution-reporting conditions; banking-channel donations alone do not qu...
Aggregation under TNMM prevents selective testing of intra-group services without comparable uncontrolled transactions, while appellate additional cla...
Protective assessment cannot duplicate identical receipts under competing characterisations; remote services did not establish a taxable permanent est...
Current account treatment of overseas tournament services removed most FEMA findings, but excess EEFC remittance and delayed repatriation remained bre...
Modification of bail conditions remains available through inherent jurisdiction where onerous deposits undermine justice and cannot recover disputed d...
The HC quashed a show-cause notice issued under s.73 of the CGST Act regarding irregularities in transitional credit claimed via TRAN-1. Relying on Usha Martin Limited vs. Additional Commissioner precedent, the court determined that despite the general rule of exhausting statutory remedies before seeking judicial review, writ petitions are maintainable when challenging actions wholly without jurisdiction. The court examined s.174 of the CGST Act and relevant constitutional provisions, concluding that parallel proceedings under both pre-GST and GST regimes for the same transaction would create legal uncertainty. The court held that the impugned show-cause notice was issued without jurisdiction and accordingly allowed the petition.
The HC quashed a show-cause notice issued under s.73 of the CGST Act regarding irregularities in transitional credit claimed via TRAN-1. Relying on Usha Martin Limited vs. Additional Commissioner precedent, the court determined that despite the general rule of exhausting statutory remedies before seeking judicial review, writ petitions are maintainable when challenging actions wholly without jurisdiction. The court examined s.174 of the CGST Act and relevant constitutional provisions, concluding that parallel proceedings under both pre-GST and GST regimes for the same transaction would create legal uncertainty. The court held that the impugned show-cause notice was issued without jurisdiction and accordingly allowed the petition.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4801
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
