Rectification of mistake remains limited to self-evident record errors, preventing merits review through miscellaneous applications and preserving fin...
Tender creditworthiness conditions may extend to de facto Promoter Directors, with post-participation challenges generally barred absent arbitrariness...
Corporate representation in PMLA summons proceedings permitted through an authorised signatory, subject to directors' continuing cooperation and atten...
Helicopter charter classification requires effective control analysis, while territorial performance, reasoned credit orders and wilful suppression de...
Specified fund definition expands PAN exemption eligibility for registered alternative investment funds and qualifying International Financial Service...
Tax exemption for specified legal-services authority income applies retrospectively, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and...
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 4803
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
