Bona fide disclosure requirements govern under-reporting penalties, and post-penalty immunity applications cannot secure available statutory protectio...
Certificate-of-origin verification procedure governs preferential customs benefits; denial without retroactive verification was set aside with consequ...
Disciplinary Committee jurisdiction and mandatory investigation requirements invalidated cancellation of an insolvency professional's registration and...
Retention of seized property survives where recorded reasons support proceeds of crime, while stayed investigation periods are excluded from limitatio...
Specified income of Baddi Barotiwala Nalagarh Development Authority receives conditional tax exemption, retrospectively covering its designated assess...
Page of 4805
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
1221 to 1240 of 96092 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 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
