Opportunity to respond to jurisdictional reports is mandatory before customs settlement duty enhancement; connected applications require consistent ad...
Specific customs headings for scaffolding components prevail over general classification, invalidating misclassification proceedings and enabling with...
Liquidator appointment under Section 34 requires consideration of creditor recommendations, valid professional authorisation, and preservation of vali...
HC quashed the impugned order passed u/s 73 of the TNGST and CGST Acts, 2017, holding that the assessment/order violated principles of natural justice. The Petitioner had received only notices in Form GST ASMT-10 and DRC-01A dated 16.10.2024 and filed substantive responses on 10.12.2024 and 21.01.2025; copies of the DRC-01 dated 16.11.2024 were not uploaded, depriving the Petitioner of an opportunity to reply to material allegations. Consequently, the HC set aside the impugned order and remitted the matter to the Respondent to decide afresh on merits and in accordance with law expeditiously. Petition disposed of.
HC quashed the impugned order passed u/s 73 of the TNGST and CGST Acts, 2017, holding that the assessment/order violated principles of natural justice. The Petitioner had received only notices in Form GST ASMT-10 and DRC-01A dated 16.10.2024 and filed substantive responses on 10.12.2024 and 21.01.2025; copies of the DRC-01 dated 16.11.2024 were not uploaded, depriving the Petitioner of an opportunity to reply to material allegations. Consequently, the HC set aside the impugned order and remitted the matter to the Respondent to decide afresh on merits and in accordance with law expeditiously. Petition disposed of.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.