Business expenditure deduction requires proof of genuine commission payments and commercial allowability; turnover growth alone cannot validate the cl...
Article 8 treaty coverage excluded third-party airline support services, while documented demonetisation cash receipts remained accepted business inco...
Functional comparability under TNMM requires highway contract benchmarks to reflect operation, maintenance and transfer activities, requiring fresh be...
The HC set aside the impugned assessment order in Form GST DRC-07 dated 23.01.2025 due to the absence of the assessing officer's signature, rendering the order invalid. Citing precedent from multiple Division Bench rulings, the Court reaffirmed that the signature on an assessment order is mandatory and cannot be cured by Sections 160 and 169 of the CGST Act, 2017. The matter was remitted to the 1st respondent for fresh assessment, mandating issuance of notice and proper signing of the new order. The limitation period is tolled from the date of the original impugned order until receipt of this judgment. The Writ Petition was accordingly disposed of with these directions.
The HC set aside the impugned assessment order in Form GST DRC-07 dated 23.01.2025 due to the absence of the assessing officer's signature, rendering the order invalid. Citing precedent from multiple Division Bench rulings, the Court reaffirmed that the signature on an assessment order is mandatory and cannot be cured by Sections 160 and 169 of the CGST Act, 2017. The matter was remitted to the 1st respondent for fresh assessment, mandating issuance of notice and proper signing of the new order. The limitation period is tolled from the date of the original impugned order until receipt of this judgment. The Writ Petition was accordingly disposed of with these directions.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.