Retention of seized property survives where recorded reasons support proceeds of crime, while stayed investigation periods are excluded from limitatio...
Specified income of Baddi Barotiwala Nalagarh Development Authority receives conditional tax exemption, retrospectively covering its designated assess...
Specified development authority income receives retrospective tax exemption, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and return-...
Unified Brand India framework introduces voluntary Trust Mark certification and funding support for export branding, packaging and global promotional ...
Origin Declaration authentication governs preferential tariff claims under India-UK CETA, requiring a validated reference number before import clearan...
Separate assessment orders for different years remain valid when distinct notices and hearing opportunities prevent prejudice from combined proceeding...
The HC set aside the impugned order dated 28.04.2024, holding that proceedings under Section 73 were vitiated for failure to issue a formal, authenticated show-cause notice (SCN) as mandated by Section 73 and Rule 142(1)(a); a summary in FORM GST DRC-01 or an attached statement of tax determination cannot substitute for a proper SCN. The court found breach of principles of natural justice where the Summary and attachments in GST DRC-01/DRC-07 lacked proper authentication and did not afford a meaningful opportunity to respond. The respondents were granted liberty to initiate fresh proceedings de novo under Section 73 if deemed appropriate. Petition allowed.
The HC set aside the impugned order dated 28.04.2024, holding that proceedings under Section 73 were vitiated for failure to issue a formal, authenticated show-cause notice (SCN) as mandated by Section 73 and Rule 142(1)(a); a summary in FORM GST DRC-01 or an attached statement of tax determination cannot substitute for a proper SCN. The court found breach of principles of natural justice where the Summary and attachments in GST DRC-01/DRC-07 lacked proper authentication and did not afford a meaningful opportunity to respond. The respondents were granted liberty to initiate fresh proceedings de novo under Section 73 if deemed appropriate. Petition allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.