Condonation of refiling delay refused where repeated defects, lack of diligence and vague explanations defeated the appeal against resolution plan app...
Page of 4828
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
4401 to 4420 of 96556 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The HC allowed the petition and held that the impugned adjudication violated Section 75(7) of the GST Act by confirming a demand exceeding the amount and grounds specified in the show-cause notice. The court quashed the order insofar as it purported to levy tax, interest and penalty beyond the Rs. 2,10,04,200 specified in the notice, and declared the enhanced demand of Rs. 3,04,55,800 unsustainable. The matter was remitted for fresh adjudication, if any, confined strictly to the amount and grounds articulated in the original notice; any fresh demand must comply with the statutory limits prescribed by Section 75(7).
The HC allowed the petition and held that the impugned adjudication violated Section 75(7) of the GST Act by confirming a demand exceeding the amount and grounds specified in the show-cause notice. The court quashed the order insofar as it purported to levy tax, interest and penalty beyond the Rs. 2,10,04,200 specified in the notice, and declared the enhanced demand of Rs. 3,04,55,800 unsustainable. The matter was remitted for fresh adjudication, if any, confined strictly to the amount and grounds articulated in the original notice; any fresh demand must comply with the statutory limits prescribed by Section 75(7).
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
