Form 26AS evidence requires successor-entity accounting verification after business transfer, while invoice-supported related-party advertising expend...
Money-laundering judgment timing requires awaiting the scheduled-offence decision despite continuation of the underlying trial where outcomes directly...
Accredited investor eligibility expands through securities-market exposure, while alternative investment fund disputes require prescribed resolution a...
Page of 4916
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
41 to 60 of 98302 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
HC quashed tax demand order dated April 27, 2024 for violating Section 75(7) of GST Act. Show-cause notice specified tax, interest and penalty amount of Rs. 4,80,527.36, but final demand raised Rs. 24,40,363.10, exceeding notice amount. Court held Section 75(7) mandates that tax, interest and penalty demanded in order cannot exceed amount specified in notice, and no demand shall be confirmed on grounds other than those specified in notice. Matter remanded to respondent authority to provide fresh hearing opportunity to petitioner and pass order in accordance with law. Petition allowed by way of remand.
HC quashed tax demand order dated April 27, 2024 for violating Section 75(7) of GST Act. Show-cause notice specified tax, interest and penalty amount of Rs. 4,80,527.36, but final demand raised Rs. 24,40,363.10, exceeding notice amount. Court held Section 75(7) mandates that tax, interest and penalty demanded in order cannot exceed amount specified in notice, and no demand shall be confirmed on grounds other than those specified in notice. Matter remanded to respondent authority to provide fresh hearing opportunity to petitioner and pass order in accordance with law. Petition allowed by way of remand.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.