Tax exemption for regulatory authority income applies retrospectively, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and return filing...
Dispute Resolution Panel objections must reach both prescribed forums; otherwise assessment may proceed and statutory appeal remains the proper remedy...
Political contribution deductions require recipient party compliance with contribution-reporting conditions; banking-channel donations alone do not qu...
Aggregation under TNMM prevents selective testing of intra-group services without comparable uncontrolled transactions, while appellate additional cla...
Protective assessment cannot duplicate identical receipts under competing characterisations; remote services did not establish a taxable permanent est...
Page of 4792
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
461 to 480 of 95833 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 issuance of a proper, duly authenticated Show Cause Notice (SCN) under Section 73(1) is mandatory and cannot be replaced by a summary in GST DRC-01 or by attaching the tax determination statement. The impugned orders passed under Section 73(9) without a valid SCN violated statutory requirements and principles of natural justice, particularly due to the absence of a hearing opportunity as mandated by Section 75(4). The Court emphasized the necessity of digital or e-signature authentication by the Proper Officer to ensure validity. Consequently, the impugned order dated 28.12.2023 was set aside. However, the respondents were permitted to initiate fresh proceedings under Section 73 in accordance with the law. The petition was allowed.
The HC held that issuance of a proper, duly authenticated Show Cause Notice (SCN) under Section 73(1) is mandatory and cannot be replaced by a summary in GST DRC-01 or by attaching the tax determination statement. The impugned orders passed under Section 73(9) without a valid SCN violated statutory requirements and principles of natural justice, particularly due to the absence of a hearing opportunity as mandated by Section 75(4). The Court emphasized the necessity of digital or e-signature authentication by the Proper Officer to ensure validity. Consequently, the impugned order dated 28.12.2023 was set aside. However, the respondents were permitted to initiate fresh proceedings under Section 73 in accordance with the law. The petition was allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.