Specialized Investment Fund distribution now requires dedicated certification, while transitional recognition preserves existing qualified distributor...
Overlapping GST proceedings require Central and State authorities to designate one competent authority for coordinated adjudication of the same matter...
Composite healthcare supplies retain exemption when patient care is the contract's essential character, despite payment through an implementing agency...
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 
of 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
