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 dismissed petitioner's challenge to order under Section 73 of WBGST/CGST Act, 2017. Petitioner contended proper officer predetermined outcome by serving Form GST DRC-01A notice before show cause notice, violating natural justice. Court found no irregularity as petitioner received adequate opportunity to respond to show cause before personal hearing was scheduled. Despite petitioner's claim of unawareness due to accountant change, Court noted petitioner continued portal operations and filing returns throughout proceedings. Section 75(4) permits hearing opportunity when adverse decision is contemplated. Petitioner failed to appear for scheduled hearing, thus cannot question the process. No predetermination or natural justice violation established. Petition disposed of without interference to impugned order.
HC dismissed petitioner's challenge to order under Section 73 of WBGST/CGST Act, 2017. Petitioner contended proper officer predetermined outcome by serving Form GST DRC-01A notice before show cause notice, violating natural justice. Court found no irregularity as petitioner received adequate opportunity to respond to show cause before personal hearing was scheduled. Despite petitioner's claim of unawareness due to accountant change, Court noted petitioner continued portal operations and filing returns throughout proceedings. Section 75(4) permits hearing opportunity when adverse decision is contemplated. Petitioner failed to appear for scheduled hearing, thus cannot question the process. No predetermination or natural justice violation established. Petition disposed of without interference to impugned order.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4803
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
