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 quashed and set aside the impugned order of tax and penalty levy under Sec. 129(3) of the GST Act due to a flagrant violation of principles of natural justice. The respondent authorities passed the order on the same day as the interception of goods without granting the petitioner adequate opportunity to respond to the show-cause notice, despite the statutory seven-day period for such orders. The court declined to examine the merits of the levy, focusing solely on procedural impropriety. The matter was remanded to the respondent authorities for reconsideration and to afford the petitioner a proper hearing. The petition was allowed accordingly.
The HC quashed and set aside the impugned order of tax and penalty levy under Sec. 129(3) of the GST Act due to a flagrant violation of principles of natural justice. The respondent authorities passed the order on the same day as the interception of goods without granting the petitioner adequate opportunity to respond to the show-cause notice, despite the statutory seven-day period for such orders. The court declined to examine the merits of the levy, focusing solely on procedural impropriety. The matter was remanded to the respondent authorities for reconsideration and to afford the petitioner a proper hearing. The petition was allowed accordingly.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.