Advance-ruling mechanism governs pending GST classification, exemption and taxability disputes, limiting writ review once the specialised forum functi...
Charitable trust income application permits verified capital expenditure but rejects deferred pre-operative claims and requires reconsideration of con...
Reinsurance premium deductions require established regulatory breaches, while independently acquired software qualifies within the computer depreciati...
Page of 4796
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
761 to 780 of 95918 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.