Reassessment under s.148A held valid; s.69 additions totaling Rs.7,00,000 deleted after acceptable contemporaneous explanations for property investmen...
Adjudication set aside; Rule 9 valuation based on internet engineer report quashed for Rule 3(4) non-compliance; Section 138B cross-examination requir...
The HC dismissed the petitions and upheld the impugned proceedings. It held that Section 6(1) CGST creates automatic cross-empowerment: officers appointed under State/UT GST Acts are deemed proper officers for CGST unless the Government, on Council recommendation, issues a notification imposing conditions. No separate notification is required to confer basic jurisdiction; notifications only operate to subject that empowerment to conditions. Intelligence-based enforcement proceedings (including issuance of SCNs by Central officers) may be initiated even where amount involved is below Rs.1 crore, whereas audit/scrutiny-based proceedings remain with the tax authority to which the assessee is assigned. The permissibility of "bunching" SCNs across years was left open for adjudication; petitions lacked merit.
The HC dismissed the petitions and upheld the impugned proceedings. It held that Section 6(1) CGST creates automatic cross-empowerment: officers appointed under State/UT GST Acts are deemed proper officers for CGST unless the Government, on Council recommendation, issues a notification imposing conditions. No separate notification is required to confer basic jurisdiction; notifications only operate to subject that empowerment to conditions. Intelligence-based enforcement proceedings (including issuance of SCNs by Central officers) may be initiated even where amount involved is below Rs.1 crore, whereas audit/scrutiny-based proceedings remain with the tax authority to which the assessee is assigned. The permissibility of "bunching" SCNs across years was left open for adjudication; petitions lacked merit.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.