Development agreements require legal possession or effective enjoyment for capital gains transfer; permissive possession and deferred consideration de...
Prolonged sterilisation of development rights supports capital-gains treatment, while business-income disallowances cannot govern capital-gains comput...
Additional evidence in transfer pricing dispute leads to fresh examination, while tax deductions, TDS credit, fee and refund interest require verifica...
Category II AIF pass-through taxation preserves non-business income character; investment receipts cannot be reclassified without applying recognised ...
The HC allowed the writ petition, holding that the impugned assessment order violated Rule 142(1A) of the CGST Rules, 2017 and principles of natural justice by failing to serve a prior show-cause notice; the Court adhered to its consistent jurisprudence that non-issuance of the requisite notice vitiates the assessment process. The HC set aside Order-in-Original No.70/2024-25-GST dated 25.02.2025 and remanded the matter to the assessing authority for completion of assessment in accordance with law after issuance of the necessary notice. The period from the date of the impugned order until receipt of the HC order is excluded for limitation. Petition allowed by remand.
The HC allowed the writ petition, holding that the impugned assessment order violated Rule 142(1A) of the CGST Rules, 2017 and principles of natural justice by failing to serve a prior show-cause notice; the Court adhered to its consistent jurisprudence that non-issuance of the requisite notice vitiates the assessment process. The HC set aside Order-in-Original No.70/2024-25-GST dated 25.02.2025 and remanded the matter to the assessing authority for completion of assessment in accordance with law after issuance of the necessary notice. The period from the date of the impugned order until receipt of the HC order is excluded for limitation. Petition allowed by remand.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.