Development agreements require legal possession or effective enjoyment for capital gains transfer; permissive possession and deferred consideration de...
Prolonged sterilisation of development rights supports capital-gains treatment, while business-income disallowances cannot govern capital-gains comput...
Additional evidence in transfer pricing dispute leads to fresh examination, while tax deductions, TDS credit, fee and refund interest require verifica...
Category II AIF pass-through taxation preserves non-business income character; investment receipts cannot be reclassified without applying recognised ...
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.