Online bond platforms may offer overseas-regulated products and tax-specific bonds subject to disclosures, compliance safeguards and revised complianc...
Corporate guarantee valuation permits actual ascertainable commission while barring retroactive application and extended-period penalties for bona fid...
Proper-officer jurisdiction under UPGST penalty provisions upheld; participation on merits prevents bypassing the statutory appellate remedy through w...
Transitioned CENVAT credit may validly satisfy mandatory pre-deposit requirements for legacy service tax appeals through Electronic Credit Ledger debi...
Building-plan sanction charges require statutory authority; unauthorised fees and GST were quashed, while labour cess must follow prescribed collectio...
Pure-agent exclusion fails where hotel booking facilitators receive third-party services themselves, making entire customer consideration taxable as r...
The HC set aside the cancellation of the petitioner's registration, finding that the impugned order lacked application of mind and did not assign reasons, thereby violating principles of natural justice. The cancellation was not in accordance with the prescribed grounds under Section 29 of the GST Act. The petitioner's revocation application was wrongly rejected for non-submission of a reply to the show cause notice, and the subsequent appeal was dismissed without reasons. The court held that the doctrine of merger does not apply where the cancellation order is unreasoned. The limitation ground cited in rejecting the appeal was also found untenable. Consequently, the petition was allowed, reinstating the petitioner's registration.
The HC set aside the cancellation of the petitioner's registration, finding that the impugned order lacked application of mind and did not assign reasons, thereby violating principles of natural justice. The cancellation was not in accordance with the prescribed grounds under Section 29 of the GST Act. The petitioner's revocation application was wrongly rejected for non-submission of a reply to the show cause notice, and the subsequent appeal was dismissed without reasons. The court held that the doctrine of merger does not apply where the cancellation order is unreasoned. The limitation ground cited in rejecting the appeal was also found untenable. Consequently, the petition was allowed, reinstating the petitioner's registration.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4798
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
