Electronic WhatsApp evidence without authentication or independent corroboration cannot sustain an unexplained-investment addition based on third-part...
Mutual current-account transactions excluded from deemed dividend treatment where no fresh borrowing arose; unsupported unsecured-loan addition also f...
HC held that the CTO's order violated principles of natural justice by failing to provide the Company an opportunity to be heard and not addressing its legal submissions. The order lacked substantive reasoning, which is essential for a legally valid quasi-judicial decision. Consequently, the impugned demand order was set aside as it contravened procedural fairness and Section 75(4) of CGST Act, which mandates granting a hearing before adverse action. Petition allowed, order quashed.
HC held that the CTO's order violated principles of natural justice by failing to provide the Company an opportunity to be heard and not addressing its legal submissions. The order lacked substantive reasoning, which is essential for a legally valid quasi-judicial decision. Consequently, the impugned demand order was set aside as it contravened procedural fairness and Section 75(4) of CGST Act, which mandates granting a hearing before adverse action. Petition allowed, order quashed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
