Works contract classification governs composite layout-development contracts where VAT-paid goods are transferred alongside construction and infrastru...
Specified income tax exemption for pollution control body remains conditional on non-commercial activity, unchanged income character, and return filin...
Jurisdictional facts in certificate-of-origin discrepancies can support customs show-cause proceedings, leaving factual explanations for departmental ...
HC invalidated the tax recovery action against the petitioner, finding the assessment order withdrawn under Section 62(2) as a matter of legal fiction. The court determined that since the original tax assessment order lost legal efficacy after the petitioner timely filed GSTR 3B and paid taxes within statutory period, the subsequent recovery proceedings were procedurally improper. The respondent tax authority acted ultra vires by initiating recovery without issuing prior notice, particularly after approximately five years from the original demand date. The HC directed respondent authorities to file their response within two weeks and scheduled further hearing.
HC invalidated the tax recovery action against the petitioner, finding the assessment order withdrawn under Section 62(2) as a matter of legal fiction. The court determined that since the original tax assessment order lost legal efficacy after the petitioner timely filed GSTR 3B and paid taxes within statutory period, the subsequent recovery proceedings were procedurally improper. The respondent tax authority acted ultra vires by initiating recovery without issuing prior notice, particularly after approximately five years from the original demand date. The HC directed respondent authorities to file their response within two weeks and scheduled further hearing.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
