Online bond platforms may offer overseas-regulated products and tax-specific bonds subject to disclosures, compliance safeguards and revised complianc...
Corporate guarantee valuation permits actual ascertainable commission while barring retroactive application and extended-period penalties for bona fid...
Proper-officer jurisdiction under UPGST penalty provisions upheld; participation on merits prevents bypassing the statutory appellate remedy through w...
Transitioned CENVAT credit may validly satisfy mandatory pre-deposit requirements for legacy service tax appeals through Electronic Credit Ledger debi...
Building-plan sanction charges require statutory authority; unauthorised fees and GST were quashed, while labour cess must follow prescribed collectio...
Pure-agent exclusion fails where hotel booking facilitators receive third-party services themselves, making entire customer consideration taxable as r...
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.