Rectification of mistake remains limited to self-evident record errors, preventing merits review through miscellaneous applications and preserving fin...
Tender creditworthiness conditions may extend to de facto Promoter Directors, with post-participation challenges generally barred absent arbitrariness...
Corporate representation in PMLA summons proceedings permitted through an authorised signatory, subject to directors' continuing cooperation and atten...
Helicopter charter classification requires effective control analysis, while territorial performance, reasoned credit orders and wilful suppression de...
Specified fund definition expands PAN exemption eligibility for registered alternative investment funds and qualifying International Financial Service...
Tax exemption for specified legal-services authority income applies retrospectively, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and...
The HC set aside the impugned order dated 29.09.2023 passed by the Commissioner, CGST & Central Excise, Patna-II, holding that the petitioner's reply was not duly considered, resulting in a violation of natural justice. The authority determined service tax liability due to the petitioner's failure to furnish work agreements and payment certificates for specified items, but did not issue a further show cause notice to allow submission of such documents. The Court found this omission procedurally unfair and interfered with the order, remanding the matter to the concerned authority for fresh consideration in accordance with principles of natural justice. The petition was allowed by way of remand.
The HC set aside the impugned order dated 29.09.2023 passed by the Commissioner, CGST & Central Excise, Patna-II, holding that the petitioner's reply was not duly considered, resulting in a violation of natural justice. The authority determined service tax liability due to the petitioner's failure to furnish work agreements and payment certificates for specified items, but did not issue a further show cause notice to allow submission of such documents. The Court found this omission procedurally unfair and interfered with the order, remanding the matter to the concerned authority for fresh consideration in accordance with principles of natural justice. The petition was allowed by way of remand.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.