Transaction value rejection requires reliable corroboration; refundable VAT is excluded and temporary registration does not defeat new-vehicle exempti...
Appellate jurisdiction remains available where a wrist-worn gold ornament cannot conclusively be characterised as imported baggage at the preliminary ...
Written complaint requirement bars cognizance on police reports for securities offences, while unsupported breach of trust and cheating allegations fa...
Risk-based postal import clearance standardises electronic assessment, document requests, duty realisation and delivery controls at Foreign Post Offic...
Page of 4786
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
61 to 80 of 95715 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 supplanted by a summary notice in GST DRC-01 or an attached tax determination statement. The impugned orders under Section 73(9) were quashed for lack of valid SCN issuance and failure to provide an opportunity of hearing as required under Section 75(4), thereby violating natural justice. The Court clarified that the Proper Officer must issue the SCN, Statement under Section 73(3), and the final order under Section 73(9), with digital authentication per Rule 26(3) due to regulatory gaps. The orders passed without proper SCN and hearing were set aside. However, liberty was granted to respondents to initiate fresh proceedings under Section 73 in accordance with statutory mandates and principles of natural justice. 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 supplanted by a summary notice in GST DRC-01 or an attached tax determination statement. The impugned orders under Section 73(9) were quashed for lack of valid SCN issuance and failure to provide an opportunity of hearing as required under Section 75(4), thereby violating natural justice. The Court clarified that the Proper Officer must issue the SCN, Statement under Section 73(3), and the final order under Section 73(9), with digital authentication per Rule 26(3) due to regulatory gaps. The orders passed without proper SCN and hearing were set aside. However, liberty was granted to respondents to initiate fresh proceedings under Section 73 in accordance with statutory mandates and principles of natural justice. The petition was allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.