Opportunity to respond to jurisdictional reports is mandatory before customs settlement duty enhancement; connected applications require consistent ad...
Specific customs headings for scaffolding components prevail over general classification, invalidating misclassification proceedings and enabling with...
Liquidator appointment under Section 34 requires consideration of creditor recommendations, valid professional authorisation, and preservation of vali...
Income-tax exemption for specified regulatory fees and government grants applies subject to non-commercial activity and continuing compliance conditio...
Digital accessibility audit and remediation deadlines extended, while all other disability-compliance obligations for regulated entities remain unchan...
Page of 4803
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
621 to 640 of 96047 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
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.
TaxTMI 
of 4803
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
