Charitable trust registration requires a specified-violation notice; settled cash deposits and related-party payments did not justify cancellation or ...
External development charges trigger TDS under section 194C, while disputed administrative payments require factual verification and fresh adjudicatio...
Section 270AA penalty immunity requires identified statutory defaults and a hearing before rejection; reassessment disclosure may constitute under-rep...
Section 80JJAA employee-cost deduction allowed for deployed staff but barred against transfer-pricing income enhancement, with pricing issues remanded...
Transfer-pricing methodology protects commercially genuine associated-enterprise payments, while pre-2016 secondary adjustments and related notional i...
Negative liens over operating assets can constitute international transactions requiring arm's-length pricing reflecting restricted borrowing and expa...
Cross-examination rights in Customs Broker revocation inquiries require witness examination; procedural denial may be cured through fresh adjudication...
The HC held that the impugned ex-parte assessment order violated principles of natural justice due to non-compliance with Section 75(4) of the BGST Act, 2017, as no opportunity for personal hearing was granted. The show cause notice failed to specify the date, time, and venue for personal hearing, which is mandatory and cannot be left to the petitioner to choose. Additionally, mere uploading of proceedings on the portal without serving notice through at least two prescribed modes under Section 169 was held insufficient. The court set aside the impugned actions and directed the competent authority to schedule a personal hearing with proper notice specifying date, time, and venue, ensuring adherence to statutory procedural safeguards. The petition was allowed accordingly.
The HC held that the impugned ex-parte assessment order violated principles of natural justice due to non-compliance with Section 75(4) of the BGST Act, 2017, as no opportunity for personal hearing was granted. The show cause notice failed to specify the date, time, and venue for personal hearing, which is mandatory and cannot be left to the petitioner to choose. Additionally, mere uploading of proceedings on the portal without serving notice through at least two prescribed modes under Section 169 was held insufficient. The court set aside the impugned actions and directed the competent authority to schedule a personal hearing with proper notice specifying date, time, and venue, ensuring adherence to statutory procedural safeguards. The petition was allowed accordingly.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
