Faceless reassessment jurisdiction turned on retrospective AO definition, with later faceless-assessment changes treated as clarificatory and procedur...
Page of 4805
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
2121 to 2140 of 96100 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The HC quashed the impugned order dated 10.02.2025 and remitted the matter to the respondent with directions to pass a fresh order levying a reduced penalty under section 47(2) after issuing due notice to the petitioner. The court observed the petitioner failed to furnish the annual return (GSTR-9) for FY 2020-21 beyond the statutory window under section 44(2) and Rule 80(1A), but treated the late-fee/demand under section 47(2) as venial, noting the petitioner's willingness to file the return. The petition is disposed of with the respondent directed to re-determine penalty quantum consistent with these observations.
The HC quashed the impugned order dated 10.02.2025 and remitted the matter to the respondent with directions to pass a fresh order levying a reduced penalty under section 47(2) after issuing due notice to the petitioner. The court observed the petitioner failed to furnish the annual return (GSTR-9) for FY 2020-21 beyond the statutory window under section 44(2) and Rule 80(1A), but treated the late-fee/demand under section 47(2) as venial, noting the petitioner's willingness to file the return. The petition is disposed of with the respondent directed to re-determine penalty quantum consistent with these observations.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.