Independent show-cause notices remain separate proceedings, while customs adjudication challenges should ordinarily follow the statutory appellate rem...
Institutional incapacity in customs settlement proceedings excludes non-functional quorum periods from statutory disposal timelines, preventing automa...
Interactive touchscreen panels with integrated computing functions fall under automatic data-processing machines rather than display monitors for cust...
Ex parte injunction service requirements were substantially met, while civil recovery and SFIO investigation into provident fund defalcation continued...
Enforcement of resolution-plan directions continues without a Supreme Court stay, preventing suspension of redistribution and escrowed-fund distributi...
Third-party ownership claims over attached property require Special Court adjudication where purchasers lack registered sale deeds and bona fides rema...
Pure-agent reimbursements in clearing and forwarding services are excluded from taxable value when qualifying third-party payments are properly record...
Customs relief for Strait of Hormuz maritime disruptions remains available, with existing conditions continuing unchanged through the extended validit...
Page of 4792
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
221 to 240 of 95833 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
HC allowed the petition, finding a violation of Section 75(7) of GST Act. The tax authority issued a show-cause notice for Rs. 45,66,398 but subsequently raised a demand of Rs. 68,07,953, which exceeded the original notice amount. The court held that this contravened statutory provisions regarding tax determination. The petitioner's claim of being unaware of the notice due to its placement in an 'Additional Notices and Orders' tab was considered valid. The court emphasized that the demand must not surpass the amount specified in the original notice, rendering the impugned order unsustainable. The judgment upheld principles of natural justice and statutory compliance.
HC allowed the petition, finding a violation of Section 75(7) of GST Act. The tax authority issued a show-cause notice for Rs. 45,66,398 but subsequently raised a demand of Rs. 68,07,953, which exceeded the original notice amount. The court held that this contravened statutory provisions regarding tax determination. The petitioner's claim of being unaware of the notice due to its placement in an 'Additional Notices and Orders' tab was considered valid. The court emphasized that the demand must not surpass the amount specified in the original notice, rendering the impugned order unsustainable. The judgment upheld principles of natural justice and statutory compliance.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4792
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
