Transfer-pricing aggregation of distinct support-service and subcontract transactions was rejected, while debt-free receivables attracted no notional ...
Customs exemptions cover photovoltaic assembly machinery and PVF backsheets, while fully declared cleared imports may avoid confiscation and penalties...
Specific tariff classification for LCD devices overrides treatment as electricity-meter parts, defeating differential duty, extended limitation, and p...
Stayed disciplinary punishment does not establish unfitness for insolvency professional registration; reconsideration must disregard mere pendency of ...
Indirect corporate control can create related-party status, excluding financial creditors from Committee of Creditors representation, participation an...
Scientific research association approval requires continuing SIRO status, annual donation reporting, and donor certificates for the approved foundatio...
Page of 4888
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
241 to 260 of 97755 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The HC quashed an ex-parte assessment order dated 02.07.2024 passed without serving proper notice to the petitioner, finding it wholly without jurisdiction and a nullity due to violation of principles of natural justice. The court held that only one operative assessment order can subsist for the same assessment period. A subsequent assessment order dated 12.07.2024, passed after affording opportunity of personal hearing and considering material produced, was deemed valid and tenable. The court emphasized that decisions made after hearing are more authoritative than default decisions, and taxpayers must have opportunity to present their case. The writ petition was disposed of by quashing the ex-parte order while upholding the order passed on merits.
The HC quashed an ex-parte assessment order dated 02.07.2024 passed without serving proper notice to the petitioner, finding it wholly without jurisdiction and a nullity due to violation of principles of natural justice. The court held that only one operative assessment order can subsist for the same assessment period. A subsequent assessment order dated 12.07.2024, passed after affording opportunity of personal hearing and considering material produced, was deemed valid and tenable. The court emphasized that decisions made after hearing are more authoritative than default decisions, and taxpayers must have opportunity to present their case. The writ petition was disposed of by quashing the ex-parte order while upholding the order passed on merits.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.