Introducing the “In Favour Of” filter in Case Laws.
- ⚖️ Instantly identify judgments decided in favour of the Assessee, Revenue, or Appellant
- 🔍 Narrow down results with higher precision
Try it now in Case Laws →
TaxTMI Login
🚀 New Feature Launched ✕
Just a moment...
Introducing the “In Favour Of” filter in Case Laws.
Try it now in Case Laws →
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Highlights
of of All Highlights
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of HC held that the respondent lacked jurisdiction to invoke the extended limitation under s.74(1) read with s.74(10) of the GST Act in the absence of fraud, wilful misstatement or suppression by the petitioner. The court found the impugned show-cause notice failed to allege omission to declare information in returns or failure to furnish information when asked, rendering Explanation 2 inapplicable. The respondent's reliance on the petitioner's conduct, earlier litigation and withdrawal did not supply requisite material to assume extended jurisdiction. Consequently, the show-cause notice dated 05.08.2024 and the consequent Order-in-Original dated 04.02.2025 were quashed and set aside; petition allowed.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
