Rectification of mistake remains limited to self-evident record errors, preventing merits review through miscellaneous applications and preserving fin...
Tender creditworthiness conditions may extend to de facto Promoter Directors, with post-participation challenges generally barred absent arbitrariness...
Corporate representation in PMLA summons proceedings permitted through an authorised signatory, subject to directors' continuing cooperation and atten...
Helicopter charter classification requires effective control analysis, while territorial performance, reasoned credit orders and wilful suppression de...
Specified fund definition expands PAN exemption eligibility for registered alternative investment funds and qualifying International Financial Service...
Tax exemption for specified legal-services authority income applies retrospectively, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and...
The HC dismissed the writ petition challenging the order issued under section 73 of the CGST/SGST Act, 2017, on grounds of alleged violation of natural justice. The court held that the petitioner was granted an opportunity of hearing but failed to appear, distinguishing non-appearance from denial of hearing. The petitioner's claim of seeking additional time was found insufficient as the hearing date was already fixed. The court ruled that the alleged procedural lapse did not amount to a violation of natural justice. Disputes regarding the merits of the order fall within statutory remedies, which the petitioner was liberty to pursue. Consequently, the petition was dismissed while preserving the petitioner's right to statutory recourse.
The HC dismissed the writ petition challenging the order issued under section 73 of the CGST/SGST Act, 2017, on grounds of alleged violation of natural justice. The court held that the petitioner was granted an opportunity of hearing but failed to appear, distinguishing non-appearance from denial of hearing. The petitioner's claim of seeking additional time was found insufficient as the hearing date was already fixed. The court ruled that the alleged procedural lapse did not amount to a violation of natural justice. Disputes regarding the merits of the order fall within statutory remedies, which the petitioner was liberty to pursue. Consequently, the petition was dismissed while preserving the petitioner's right to statutory recourse.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
