Statutory transfer formalities invalidated alleged share and property transfers, while retrospective record manipulation constituted oppression and mi...
Provisional attachment of laundered funds and equivalent-value property sustained, with statutory protection limited to pension, gratuity and providen...
Insolvency moratorium does not shield company officers from cheque dishonour prosecution for liability arising before corporate insolvency proceedings...
Advance-ruling mechanism governs pending GST classification, exemption and taxability disputes, limiting writ review once the specialised forum functi...
Page of 4805
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
921 to 940 of 96092 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 held that the impugned ex-parte assessment order and subsequent demand under Form DRC 07 were invalid due to violation of natural justice principles, specifically non-service of proper notices and failure to grant an opportunity of hearing as mandated by Section 75(4) of the BGST Act, 2017. The Court clarified that uploading notices under incorrect headings did not satisfy statutory requirements. Furthermore, the issuance of a show cause notice without scheduling a personal hearing did not constitute an opportunity for hearing since the authority was still seeking a response. As no personal hearing was provided before passing an adverse order, the statutory procedure was not followed. Consequently, the HC set aside the impugned order and allowed the petition, emphasizing strict adherence to procedural safeguards under the Act.
The HC held that the impugned ex-parte assessment order and subsequent demand under Form DRC 07 were invalid due to violation of natural justice principles, specifically non-service of proper notices and failure to grant an opportunity of hearing as mandated by Section 75(4) of the BGST Act, 2017. The Court clarified that uploading notices under incorrect headings did not satisfy statutory requirements. Furthermore, the issuance of a show cause notice without scheduling a personal hearing did not constitute an opportunity for hearing since the authority was still seeking a response. As no personal hearing was provided before passing an adverse order, the statutory procedure was not followed. Consequently, the HC set aside the impugned order and allowed the petition, emphasizing strict adherence to procedural safeguards under the Act.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.