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...
Defined public benefit can retain charitable character; registration renewal requires examining genuine activities and legal compliance, not surplus a...
Capital reduction is distinct from share buy-back, preventing buy-back tax; restructuring interest and related business deductions also survive scruti...
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.