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...
The HC set aside an assessment order dated 19.12.2024 for violating principles of natural justice due to ineffective service of show cause notice. While uploading notices on the GST Portal constitutes valid service, the respondent failed to explore alternative service modes under Section 169 of the GST Act when petitioner remained non-responsive. The court held that merely fulfilling empty formalities without ensuring effective communication defeats the purpose and leads to multiplicity of litigation. The matter was remanded to respondent for fresh consideration, conditioned upon petitioner paying 25% of disputed tax amount within four weeks. The petition was allowed by way of remand, emphasizing that officers must apply their minds to ensure meaningful service rather than mechanical compliance.
The HC set aside an assessment order dated 19.12.2024 for violating principles of natural justice due to ineffective service of show cause notice. While uploading notices on the GST Portal constitutes valid service, the respondent failed to explore alternative service modes under Section 169 of the GST Act when petitioner remained non-responsive. The court held that merely fulfilling empty formalities without ensuring effective communication defeats the purpose and leads to multiplicity of litigation. The matter was remanded to respondent for fresh consideration, conditioned upon petitioner paying 25% of disputed tax amount within four weeks. The petition was allowed by way of remand, emphasizing that officers must apply their minds to ensure meaningful service rather than mechanical compliance.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.