Online bond platforms may offer overseas-regulated products and tax-specific bonds subject to disclosures, compliance safeguards and revised complianc...
Corporate guarantee valuation permits actual ascertainable commission while barring retroactive application and extended-period penalties for bona fid...
Proper-officer jurisdiction under UPGST penalty provisions upheld; participation on merits prevents bypassing the statutory appellate remedy through w...
Transitioned CENVAT credit may validly satisfy mandatory pre-deposit requirements for legacy service tax appeals through Electronic Credit Ledger debi...
Building-plan sanction charges require statutory authority; unauthorised fees and GST were quashed, while labour cess must follow prescribed collectio...
Pure-agent exclusion fails where hotel booking facilitators receive third-party services themselves, making entire customer consideration taxable as r...
The HC dismissed the writ petition and upheld the impugned order dated 13.09.2024 cancelling the petitioner's registration, finding no breach of natural justice. The court held that the authority had issued notice of a personal hearing, an authorised representative of the petitioner attended and tendered written submissions, and no adjournment or specific request for a further hearing was made; hence the representative's conduct did not amount to denial of opportunity. The HC further held that an equivocal request for a hearing "if necessary" did not oblige the authority to seek additional clarification, and concluded there were no grounds to interfere with the administrative order.
The HC dismissed the writ petition and upheld the impugned order dated 13.09.2024 cancelling the petitioner's registration, finding no breach of natural justice. The court held that the authority had issued notice of a personal hearing, an authorised representative of the petitioner attended and tendered written submissions, and no adjournment or specific request for a further hearing was made; hence the representative's conduct did not amount to denial of opportunity. The HC further held that an equivocal request for a hearing "if necessary" did not oblige the authority to seek additional clarification, and concluded there were no grounds to interfere with the administrative order.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4800
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
