Tax appeal allowed: AO exceeded s.144C DRP mandate by introducing new findings and recharacterising non-resident receipts as permanent establishment i...
Anonymized petitioner gets partial relief: bank guarantee quashed, PVC-coated fabric released under reduced conditions while valuation proceedings con...
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 
of 4826 
Join Channel 
