Retention of seized property survives where recorded reasons support proceeds of crime, while stayed investigation periods are excluded from limitatio...
Specified income of Baddi Barotiwala Nalagarh Development Authority receives conditional tax exemption, retrospectively covering its designated assess...
Specified development authority income receives retrospective tax exemption, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and return-...
Unified Brand India framework introduces voluntary Trust Mark certification and funding support for export branding, packaging and global promotional ...
Origin Declaration authentication governs preferential tariff claims under India-UK CETA, requiring a validated reference number before import clearan...
Separate assessment orders for different years remain valid when distinct notices and hearing opportunities prevent prejudice from combined proceeding...
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.