Authentication of paper assessment orders upheld, while qualifying repairs, consumables and vendor advance write-offs remain deductible business claim...
Transaction value cannot be rejected solely on non-statutory valuation guidelines without corroborative evidence supporting reassessment of final cust...
Cross-examination rights and corroborated evidence limit customs penalties for misdeclaration in genuine import transactions involving documented clea...
Tariff classification of vehicle gear components follows the specific gearing entry, displacing motor-vehicle parts classification and related liabili...
Necessary-party requirements limit impleadment of independent entities, while deferred consideration does not create an appealable adverse determinati...
The HC found a breach of natural justice and non-application of mind in initiation of proceedings under s.73 of the GST Act, noting the personal-hearing date was fixed before the reply deadline and the impugned order was thereafter passed on a different date without any notice to the petitioner. The writ petition was allowed; the impugned orders were set aside and the matter remanded to the adjudicating authority. The authority is directed to afford the petitioner a reasonable opportunity of personal hearing and to pass a reasoned and speaking order within four weeks from today. The decision is guided by this Court's prior ruling on analogous procedural defects.
The HC found a breach of natural justice and non-application of mind in initiation of proceedings under s.73 of the GST Act, noting the personal-hearing date was fixed before the reply deadline and the impugned order was thereafter passed on a different date without any notice to the petitioner. The writ petition was allowed; the impugned orders were set aside and the matter remanded to the adjudicating authority. The authority is directed to afford the petitioner a reasonable opportunity of personal hearing and to pass a reasoned and speaking order within four weeks from today. The decision is guided by this Court's prior ruling on analogous procedural defects.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.