Defined public benefit can retain charitable character; registration renewal requires examining genuine activities and legal compliance, not surplus a...
Capital reduction is distinct from share buy-back, preventing buy-back tax; restructuring interest and related business deductions also survive scruti...
Transfer pricing and tax deductions upheld on established principles, while employee contributions and warranty provisions returned for fresh examinat...
Captive transfer pricing relies on industrial consumer tariffs, while genuine quotations can benchmark effluent treatment transfers under the Other Me...
Specific tariff classification for ophthalmic instruments and extended limitation principles determine the treatment of duty demands, confiscation, an...
Page of 4801
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
1161 to 1180 of 96001 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.