Dispute Resolution Panel objections must reach both prescribed forums; otherwise assessment may proceed and statutory appeal remains the proper remedy...
Political contribution deductions require recipient party compliance with contribution-reporting conditions; banking-channel donations alone do not qu...
Aggregation under TNMM prevents selective testing of intra-group services without comparable uncontrolled transactions, while appellate additional cla...
Protective assessment cannot duplicate identical receipts under competing characterisations; remote services did not establish a taxable permanent est...
Current account treatment of overseas tournament services removed most FEMA findings, but excess EEFC remittance and delayed repatriation remained bre...
Modification of bail conditions remains available through inherent jurisdiction where onerous deposits undermine justice and cannot recover disputed d...
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.