Opportunity to respond to jurisdictional reports is mandatory before customs settlement duty enhancement; connected applications require consistent ad...
Specific customs headings for scaffolding components prevail over general classification, invalidating misclassification proceedings and enabling with...
Liquidator appointment under Section 34 requires consideration of creditor recommendations, valid professional authorisation, and preservation of vali...
Income-tax exemption for specified regulatory fees and government grants applies subject to non-commercial activity and continuing compliance conditio...
Digital accessibility audit and remediation deadlines extended, while all other disability-compliance obligations for regulated entities remain unchan...
Page of 4803
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
621 to 640 of 96047 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
HC set aside assessment order dated 14.08.2024 for violation of natural justice principles where petitioner was denied personal hearing opportunity. Though show cause notice was uploaded on GST Portal constituting valid service, respondent failed to explore alternative service modes under Section 169 GST Act when petitioner remained non-responsive. Court held that officers must utilize other prescribed service methods like RPAD when portal service proves ineffective to avoid empty formalities and multiplicity of litigation. Matter remanded to respondent for fresh consideration conditional upon petitioner depositing 25% of disputed tax amount within four weeks. Petition allowed by way of remand emphasizing effective service requirements over mere procedural compliance.
HC set aside assessment order dated 14.08.2024 for violation of natural justice principles where petitioner was denied personal hearing opportunity. Though show cause notice was uploaded on GST Portal constituting valid service, respondent failed to explore alternative service modes under Section 169 GST Act when petitioner remained non-responsive. Court held that officers must utilize other prescribed service methods like RPAD when portal service proves ineffective to avoid empty formalities and multiplicity of litigation. Matter remanded to respondent for fresh consideration conditional upon petitioner depositing 25% of disputed tax amount within four weeks. Petition allowed by way of remand emphasizing effective service requirements over mere procedural compliance.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.