Transaction value cannot be rejected solely on non-statutory valuation guidelines without corroborative evidence supporting reassessment of final cust...
Cross-examination rights and corroborated evidence limit customs penalties for misdeclaration in genuine import transactions involving documented clea...
Tariff classification of vehicle gear components follows the specific gearing entry, displacing motor-vehicle parts classification and related liabili...
Necessary-party requirements limit impleadment of independent entities, while deferred consideration does not create an appealable adverse determinati...
Food supplement classification requires common parlance and authoritative tests, preventing treatment as proprietary Ayurvedic medicines without suppo...
Specified regulatory authority income receives conditional tax exemption, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income character, and return f...
Tax exemption for regulatory authority income applies retrospectively, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and return-filing...
Page of 4796
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
601 to 620 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 set aside the impugned assessment order dated 25.04.2024, holding that service of the show cause notice (SCN) solely via the GST portal was insufficient given the petitioner's lack of awareness and absence of personal hearing. The court emphasized that where no response is received through one mode, the officer must explore alternative service methods under Section 169(1) of the GST Act, such as RPAD, to ensure effective service. The matter was remanded to the respondent for fresh consideration, conditional upon the petitioner paying 25% of the disputed tax within four weeks of receiving the order. The setting aside of the original order will take effect only upon such payment. The petition was disposed of by way of remand to safeguard procedural fairness and prevent multiplicity of litigation.
The HC set aside the impugned assessment order dated 25.04.2024, holding that service of the show cause notice (SCN) solely via the GST portal was insufficient given the petitioner's lack of awareness and absence of personal hearing. The court emphasized that where no response is received through one mode, the officer must explore alternative service methods under Section 169(1) of the GST Act, such as RPAD, to ensure effective service. The matter was remanded to the respondent for fresh consideration, conditional upon the petitioner paying 25% of the disputed tax within four weeks of receiving the order. The setting aside of the original order will take effect only upon such payment. The petition was disposed of by way of remand to safeguard procedural fairness and prevent multiplicity of litigation.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4796
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
