Personal hearing requirements in GST adjudication were satisfied by prior opportunities and written submissions; appellate limitation received writ-pe...
Interactive flat panels meeting automatic data processing conditions are distinguished from monitors, while later classification clarifications apply ...
Page of 4798
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
761 to 780 of 95957 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
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.