Development agreements require legal possession or effective enjoyment for capital gains transfer; permissive possession and deferred consideration de...
Prolonged sterilisation of development rights supports capital-gains treatment, while business-income disallowances cannot govern capital-gains comput...
Additional evidence in transfer pricing dispute leads to fresh examination, while tax deductions, TDS credit, fee and refund interest require verifica...
Category II AIF pass-through taxation preserves non-business income character; investment receipts cannot be reclassified without applying recognised ...
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.