Overlapping GST proceedings require Central and State authorities to designate one competent authority for coordinated adjudication of the same matter...
Composite healthcare supplies retain exemption when patient care is the contract's essential character, despite payment through an implementing agency...
Receipt of immovable property requires actual possession or enjoyment; redevelopment allotments exchanged for tenancy rights fall outside deemed incom...
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.