Inherited property sale proceeds require capital-gains treatment where ownership is supported by evidence, not suspicion or unverified signature doubt...
Cross-examination of retracted statements is essential where foundational evidence supports a benami allegation and documented funding explanations re...
Capital-goods exemption covers plant-modernisation accessories, while the import restriction applies only to earlier capital-goods components and spar...
Constitutional judicial review permits challenges to ECIRs and connected money-laundering proceedings where coercive action affects fundamental intere...
The HC set aside the impugned assessment order dated 28.08.2024 for AY 2019-2020 and consequential proceedings, applying precedent from MR. SAHULHAMEED case which established that assessees are entitled to service of notice under the modes prescribed in clauses (a), (b), and (c) of Section 169(1) of CGST Act, 2017. The petitioner was directed to submit a reply to the show cause notice within two weeks, after which respondent must provide a hearing opportunity before passing orders on merits. Any bank attachment made was ordered to be released. The petition was allowed.
The HC set aside the impugned assessment order dated 28.08.2024 for AY 2019-2020 and consequential proceedings, applying precedent from MR. SAHULHAMEED case which established that assessees are entitled to service of notice under the modes prescribed in clauses (a), (b), and (c) of Section 169(1) of CGST Act, 2017. The petitioner was directed to submit a reply to the show cause notice within two weeks, after which respondent must provide a hearing opportunity before passing orders on merits. Any bank attachment made was ordered to be released. The petition was allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.