Online bond platforms may offer overseas-regulated products and tax-specific bonds subject to disclosures, compliance safeguards and revised complianc...
Corporate guarantee valuation permits actual ascertainable commission while barring retroactive application and extended-period penalties for bona fid...
Proper-officer jurisdiction under UPGST penalty provisions upheld; participation on merits prevents bypassing the statutory appellate remedy through w...
Transitioned CENVAT credit may validly satisfy mandatory pre-deposit requirements for legacy service tax appeals through Electronic Credit Ledger debi...
Building-plan sanction charges require statutory authority; unauthorised fees and GST were quashed, while labour cess must follow prescribed collectio...
Pure-agent exclusion fails where hotel booking facilitators receive third-party services themselves, making entire customer consideration taxable as r...
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.