Independent show-cause notices remain separate proceedings, while customs adjudication challenges should ordinarily follow the statutory appellate rem...
Institutional incapacity in customs settlement proceedings excludes non-functional quorum periods from statutory disposal timelines, preventing automa...
Interactive touchscreen panels with integrated computing functions fall under automatic data-processing machines rather than display monitors for cust...
Ex parte injunction service requirements were substantially met, while civil recovery and SFIO investigation into provident fund defalcation continued...
Enforcement of resolution-plan directions continues without a Supreme Court stay, preventing suspension of redistribution and escrowed-fund distributi...
Third-party ownership claims over attached property require Special Court adjudication where purchasers lack registered sale deeds and bona fides rema...
Pure-agent reimbursements in clearing and forwarding services are excluded from taxable value when qualifying third-party payments are properly record...
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 4786
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
