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...
Customs relief for Strait of Hormuz maritime disruptions remains available, with existing conditions continuing unchanged through the extended validit...
The HC allowed the petition by way of remand, finding the retrospective cancellation of the petitioner's GST registration procedurally infirm. The court held the Proper Officer issued a show-cause notice alleging registration obtained by fraud but then relied on additional grounds and evidentiary materials not disclosed or afforded to the petitioner, and failed to consider the petitioner's submitted response. Those omissions breached principles of natural justice and rendered the impugned cancellation and the rejection of the revocation application unsustainable. The matter is remitted to the Assistant Commissioner, Central GST & CX (Respondent No.4) to reopen and decide the petitioner's application for revocation afresh after giving the petitioner full opportunity to meet all grounds and evidence.
The HC allowed the petition by way of remand, finding the retrospective cancellation of the petitioner's GST registration procedurally infirm. The court held the Proper Officer issued a show-cause notice alleging registration obtained by fraud but then relied on additional grounds and evidentiary materials not disclosed or afforded to the petitioner, and failed to consider the petitioner's submitted response. Those omissions breached principles of natural justice and rendered the impugned cancellation and the rejection of the revocation application unsustainable. The matter is remitted to the Assistant Commissioner, Central GST & CX (Respondent No.4) to reopen and decide the petitioner's application for revocation afresh after giving the petitioner full opportunity to meet all grounds and evidence.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.