Transfer pricing requires evidence for AMP transactions, functionally reliable comparables, and appropriate aggregation or Berry Ratio benchmarking me...
Revisionary jurisdiction cannot reopen share capital assessments where adequate inquiry supports a permissible view and no independent error is establ...
Reassessment jurisdiction fails where unverified portal information is aggregated without examining the taxpayer's explanation or relevance of entries...
Statutory sanction for delayed reassessment requires approval from the prescribed authority; approval by an inferior authority invalidates jurisdictio...
Transfer pricing margin adjustments require matching treatment of non-operating income and related costs, with comparability issues reconsidered on ev...
Preliminary-expense amortisation and MAT exempt-income adjustments prevailed, while trademark costs and managerial remuneration require fresh verifica...
Export valuation requires contemporaneous evidence; unrelated invoices cannot prove overvaluation, and dual penalties on firm and partner are impermis...
HC held that service of notice/order via common portal is valid...
Electronic Service via Common Portal Legally Valid Under GST Act, Section 169(1)(d) Enables Direct Digital Notification Without Additional Requirements
Contents
Summary
Note
Bookmark
Share
✓ Copied successfully !
Print
Print Options
For full text, please login
Login to TaxTMI
Verification Pending
The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on
HC held that service of notice/order via common portal is valid under GST Act. Section 169(1)(d) independently provides for electronic service through common portal, without requiring additional notification under Section 146. The statutory provision explicitly enables serving decisions, orders, summons, and notices electronically. The petitioner's contention challenging portal-based service was rejected. The court set aside impugned orders, directing petitioner to deposit 25% of disputed taxes within four weeks. The judgment affirms the legal validity of electronic service mechanisms in GST proceedings.
HC held that service of notice/order via common portal is valid under GST Act. Section 169(1)(d) independently provides for electronic service through common portal, without requiring additional notification under Section 146. The statutory provision explicitly enables serving decisions, orders, summons, and notices electronically. The petitioner's contention challenging portal-based service was rejected. The court set aside impugned orders, directing petitioner to deposit 25% of disputed taxes within four weeks. The judgment affirms the legal validity of electronic service mechanisms in GST proceedings.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4800
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
