Personal hearing requirements in GST adjudication were satisfied by prior opportunities and written submissions; appellate limitation received writ-pe...
Interactive flat panels meeting automatic data processing conditions are distinguished from monitors, while later classification clarifications apply ...
Page of 4798
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
761 to 780 of 95957 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
HC set aside the Rectification Order dated 28 June 2024 and disposed of the writ petition. The Court found the impugned rectification order to be mechanical, lacking reasons and failing to apply the principle of natural justice by not affording a personal hearing when the order adversely affected the assessee. Although the petitioner filed a reply and attributed delay to a dispute with a GST consultant, the delay in challenging the December 2023 order was inadequately explained and did not justify condonation; the petitioner had the opportunity to file submissions. Nevertheless, because the rectification was issued without reasoned assessment or hearing, the HC annulled that rectification.
HC set aside the Rectification Order dated 28 June 2024 and disposed of the writ petition. The Court found the impugned rectification order to be mechanical, lacking reasons and failing to apply the principle of natural justice by not affording a personal hearing when the order adversely affected the assessee. Although the petitioner filed a reply and attributed delay to a dispute with a GST consultant, the delay in challenging the December 2023 order was inadequately explained and did not justify condonation; the petitioner had the opportunity to file submissions. Nevertheless, because the rectification was issued without reasoned assessment or hearing, the HC annulled that rectification.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4798
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
