Jurisdictional facts in certificate-of-origin discrepancies can support customs show-cause proceedings, leaving factual explanations for departmental ...
Market value for captive electricity consumption follows industrial consumer tariffs, supporting profit computation for the power generation deduction...
The HC held that the adjudicatory process violated principles of natural justice because no date for personal hearing was specified in the SCN and the petitioner company was not afforded an opportunity to be heard on the merits; however, the court found the CGST Department not at fault insofar as notices and the impugned order were uploaded on the GST portal and the petitioner failed to establish non-service. The petition for remand to the adjudicating authority was refused. In view of the petitioner's absence of a merits hearing, the HC permitted the petitioner company to pursue its statutory appellate remedy before the appropriate Appellate Authority. Petition disposed.
The HC held that the adjudicatory process violated principles of natural justice because no date for personal hearing was specified in the SCN and the petitioner company was not afforded an opportunity to be heard on the merits; however, the court found the CGST Department not at fault insofar as notices and the impugned order were uploaded on the GST portal and the petitioner failed to establish non-service. The petition for remand to the adjudicating authority was refused. In view of the petitioner's absence of a merits hearing, the HC permitted the petitioner company to pursue its statutory appellate remedy before the appropriate Appellate Authority. Petition disposed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
