Retrospective cancellation of charitable registration under section 12AB(4) was unsustainable; related-party benefit allegations did not prove nongenu...
Merger control notice and disclosure rules: Supreme Court limits penalties, rejects reopening of approved combination, and sets aside adverse findings...
The HC held that the adjudicating authority's cancellation of the petitioner's GST registration violated principles of natural justice because no show-cause notice or detailed reasons were furnished, rendering the impugned order cryptic and unsustainable. The court further determined that under section 107(11) the appellate authority lacks power to remit the matter back to the adjudicating authority for a "second inning"; having concluded the original order could not be sustained, the appellate remand was unjustified. Accordingly, the HC set aside the portion of the impugned appellate order remanding the matter to the Assistant/Deputy Commissioner and quashed the subsequent order; petition allowed in favor of the petitioner.
The HC held that the adjudicating authority's cancellation of the petitioner's GST registration violated principles of natural justice because no show-cause notice or detailed reasons were furnished, rendering the impugned order cryptic and unsustainable. The court further determined that under section 107(11) the appellate authority lacks power to remit the matter back to the adjudicating authority for a "second inning"; having concluded the original order could not be sustained, the appellate remand was unjustified. Accordingly, the HC set aside the portion of the impugned appellate order remanding the matter to the Assistant/Deputy Commissioner and quashed the subsequent order; petition allowed in favor of the petitioner.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.