Commercial vehicle depreciation, scientifically determined warranty provisions and exempt-income disallowances were resolved in favour of the taxpayer...
Inherited property sale proceeds require capital-gains treatment where ownership is supported by evidence, not suspicion or unverified signature doubt...
Cross-examination of retracted statements is essential where foundational evidence supports a benami allegation and documented funding explanations re...
The HC set aside the impugned order dated 27.12.2023, holding that initiation under Section 73 was unlawful for lack of a formal, duly authenticated show cause notice (SCN) as mandated by Section 73 and Rule 142(1)(a); a summary in FORM GST DRC-01 and an attached statement cannot substitute a proper SCN. The court found failure to authenticate notices (Rule 26(3) applied by default) and breach of Section 75(4)'s opportunity-to-be-heard mandate, amounting to violation of natural justice. The HC quashed the decision and granted the revenue liberty to institute fresh proceedings de novo under Section 73, if deemed appropriate.
The HC set aside the impugned order dated 27.12.2023, holding that initiation under Section 73 was unlawful for lack of a formal, duly authenticated show cause notice (SCN) as mandated by Section 73 and Rule 142(1)(a); a summary in FORM GST DRC-01 and an attached statement cannot substitute a proper SCN. The court found failure to authenticate notices (Rule 26(3) applied by default) and breach of Section 75(4)'s opportunity-to-be-heard mandate, amounting to violation of natural justice. The HC quashed the decision and granted the revenue liberty to institute fresh proceedings de novo under Section 73, if deemed appropriate.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.