Blocked input tax credit for resort construction remains unavailable; interest follows actual utilisation, while delayed payment attracts statutory pe...
Duplicate PAN allocation requires record verification and deactivation reasons before assessment-related transactions can be attributed to an assessee...
Faceless assessment safeguards require requested personal hearings and adequate final show-cause response time, failing which reassessment is required...
The HC quashed an ex-parte adjudication order requiring the petitioner-company to pay Rs. 2,20,75,208/- in tax, interest, and penalty under Section 73 of the KGST Act. Despite the petitioner's failure to respond to both the intimation dated 28.11.2023 and the show cause notice dated 08.12.2023, or to participate in the proceedings, the Court adopted a justice-oriented approach. The matter was remanded to respondent No. 3, providing the petitioner one more opportunity to submit a reply to the show cause notice and contest the proceedings. The Court made no determination on the merits of the case, directing further proceedings in accordance with law.
The HC quashed an ex-parte adjudication order requiring the petitioner-company to pay Rs. 2,20,75,208/- in tax, interest, and penalty under Section 73 of the KGST Act. Despite the petitioner's failure to respond to both the intimation dated 28.11.2023 and the show cause notice dated 08.12.2023, or to participate in the proceedings, the Court adopted a justice-oriented approach. The matter was remanded to respondent No. 3, providing the petitioner one more opportunity to submit a reply to the show cause notice and contest the proceedings. The Court made no determination on the merits of the case, directing further proceedings in accordance with law.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
