Retrospective cancellation of charitable registration under section 12AB(4) was unsustainable; related-party benefit allegations did not prove nongenu...
Merger control notice and disclosure rules: Supreme Court limits penalties, rejects reopening of approved combination, and sets aside adverse findings...
The HC held that since the entire tax liability was discharged through the electronic credit ledger before any intimation or show-cause notice, and there was no wilful mis-statement or suppression by the petitioner, the provisions of Sec. 74 of the GST Act are inapplicable. The petitioner's failure to offset the tax liability from the credit ledger was inadvertent and not indicative of fraud. Consequently, the HC directed the respondent AO to pass a fresh de novo order under Sec. 73 of the GST Act, after affording the petitioner an opportunity of hearing, within three months from receipt of the order. The petition was disposed of accordingly.
The HC held that since the entire tax liability was discharged through the electronic credit ledger before any intimation or show-cause notice, and there was no wilful mis-statement or suppression by the petitioner, the provisions of Sec. 74 of the GST Act are inapplicable. The petitioner's failure to offset the tax liability from the credit ledger was inadvertent and not indicative of fraud. Consequently, the HC directed the respondent AO to pass a fresh de novo order under Sec. 73 of the GST Act, after affording the petitioner an opportunity of hearing, within three months from receipt of the order. The petition was disposed of accordingly.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4817 
Join Channel 
