Opportunity to respond to jurisdictional reports is mandatory before customs settlement duty enhancement; connected applications require consistent ad...
Specific customs headings for scaffolding components prevail over general classification, invalidating misclassification proceedings and enabling with...
Liquidator appointment under Section 34 requires consideration of creditor recommendations, valid professional authorisation, and preservation of vali...
Income-tax exemption for specified regulatory fees and government grants applies subject to non-commercial activity and continuing compliance conditio...
Digital accessibility audit and remediation deadlines extended, while all other disability-compliance obligations for regulated entities remain unchan...
Page of 4803
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
621 to 640 of 96047 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
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.
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.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.