Political contribution deductions require genuine transactions; banking records and party registration alone cannot defeat evidence of accommodation e...
Post-death GST liability permits fresh proceedings against legal representatives, while discontinued-business recovery remains limited to the inherite...
Non-confirmation of FEMA seizure prevents adjudicators from overriding pending appellate findings on recorded reasons and suspected foreign asset hold...
CESTAT held that an adjudicating authority cannot invoke section 28(9A) to suspend a show cause notice before the expiry of the default periods under section 28(9) unless the specific circumstances enumerated in section 28(9A) exist and are communicated; subsections (9) and (9A) must be read harmoniously, with (9A) operating only to erase the "date of notice" where the statutory reasons obtain. The authority's unilateral, open-ended deferment within six months without granting the statutory opportunity to be heard or demonstrating any enumerated circumstance was invalid. The impugned order is set aside and the appellant's appeal is allowed; proceedings must comply with section 28's procedural safeguards.
CESTAT held that an adjudicating authority cannot invoke section 28(9A) to suspend a show cause notice before the expiry of the default periods under section 28(9) unless the specific circumstances enumerated in section 28(9A) exist and are communicated; subsections (9) and (9A) must be read harmoniously, with (9A) operating only to erase the "date of notice" where the statutory reasons obtain. The authority's unilateral, open-ended deferment within six months without granting the statutory opportunity to be heard or demonstrating any enumerated circumstance was invalid. The impugned order is set aside and the appellant's appeal is allowed; proceedings must comply with section 28's procedural safeguards.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
