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" ?
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.