Specified regulatory authority income receives conditional tax exemption, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income character, and return f...
Tax exemption for regulatory authority income applies retrospectively, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and return-filing...
Input tax credit conditions remain constitutionally valid, with eligible recipient claims considered under GST circulars and retrospective filing dead...
Bogus donation receipts justified commission income assessment and defeated political-party tax exemption for inaccurate accounts and reporting failur...
Pure reimbursement without income element escapes tax withholding, while delayed withholding and unsupported provisions face deferred or renewed scrut...
Public benefit requirement defeats charitable registration where residents' association services are reciprocal, member-only facilities governed by mu...
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.