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...
Specified development authority income receives retrospective tax exemption, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and return-...
Unified Brand India framework introduces voluntary Trust Mark certification and funding support for export branding, packaging and global promotional ...
Origin Declaration authentication governs preferential tariff claims under India-UK CETA, requiring a validated reference number before import clearan...
Separate assessment orders for different years remain valid when distinct notices and hearing opportunities prevent prejudice from combined proceeding...
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 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
