Online bond platforms may offer overseas-regulated products and tax-specific bonds subject to disclosures, compliance safeguards and revised complianc...
Corporate guarantee valuation permits actual ascertainable commission while barring retroactive application and extended-period penalties for bona fid...
Proper-officer jurisdiction under UPGST penalty provisions upheld; participation on merits prevents bypassing the statutory appellate remedy through w...
Transitioned CENVAT credit may validly satisfy mandatory pre-deposit requirements for legacy service tax appeals through Electronic Credit Ledger debi...
Building-plan sanction charges require statutory authority; unauthorised fees and GST were quashed, while labour cess must follow prescribed collectio...
Pure-agent exclusion fails where hotel booking facilitators receive third-party services themselves, making entire customer consideration taxable as r...
HC held that GST registration license cancellation was improper due to procedural irregularities. The visit note by the CGST Superintendent lacked corroborative evidence, as no additional witnesses were present during the physical verification. The officer failed to record statements from nearby shop owners and obtain their signatures, rendering the verification process fundamentally flawed. The subsequent administrative orders at different levels were found unsustainable, primarily because the initial verification was conducted without proper protocol. The court emphasized the importance of following Rule 25 of GST Rules 2017, which mandates comprehensive documentation and witness verification during business premise inspections. Consequently, the petitioner's license cancellation was quashed, and the administrative orders were set aside.
HC held that GST registration license cancellation was improper due to procedural irregularities. The visit note by the CGST Superintendent lacked corroborative evidence, as no additional witnesses were present during the physical verification. The officer failed to record statements from nearby shop owners and obtain their signatures, rendering the verification process fundamentally flawed. The subsequent administrative orders at different levels were found unsustainable, primarily because the initial verification was conducted without proper protocol. The court emphasized the importance of following Rule 25 of GST Rules 2017, which mandates comprehensive documentation and witness verification during business premise inspections. Consequently, the petitioner's license cancellation was quashed, and the administrative orders were set aside.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
