Pre-existing operational debt disputes require genuine evidence, while undirected running-account payments may be appropriated on a first-in-first-out...
Agency in CNG distribution makes outlet operators commission agents, rendering taxable Business Auxiliary Service rather than purchasing goods for res...
Composite inpatient healthcare supply may retain exemption despite MRP medicine billing, while separate taxable sale characterisation remains disputed...
Working-capital adjustment determines whether software-services transfer-pricing margins fall within the statutory tolerance range, eliminating any ad...
Permanent establishment deductions upheld for expatriate salaries, direct costs and trading losses, while head-office costs require fresh classificati...
Page of 4807
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
1101 to 1120 of 96136 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 allowed the petition, holding that principles of natural justice were violated by uploading the show-cause notice on the GST portal without physically serving the Petitioner and without affording a hearing. The Court found the petitioner's explanation for a 288-day delay in filing the appeal to be bona fide and, accordingly, set aside the impugned order dated 28.03.2025 passed by Respondent 1 and condoned the 288-day delay. Conditionally permitting the appeal to proceed, the HC directed the Petitioner to remit an additional deposit of 5% of the disputed tax demand, over and above the 10% statutory deposit (as agreed), to Respondent 2 within four weeks of receipt of the order. Petition disposed.
The HC allowed the petition, holding that principles of natural justice were violated by uploading the show-cause notice on the GST portal without physically serving the Petitioner and without affording a hearing. The Court found the petitioner's explanation for a 288-day delay in filing the appeal to be bona fide and, accordingly, set aside the impugned order dated 28.03.2025 passed by Respondent 1 and condoned the 288-day delay. Conditionally permitting the appeal to proceed, the HC directed the Petitioner to remit an additional deposit of 5% of the disputed tax demand, over and above the 10% statutory deposit (as agreed), to Respondent 2 within four weeks of receipt of the order. Petition disposed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4807
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
