Inherited property sale proceeds require capital-gains treatment where ownership is supported by evidence, not suspicion or unverified signature doubt...
Cross-examination of retracted statements is essential where foundational evidence supports a benami allegation and documented funding explanations re...
Capital-goods exemption covers plant-modernisation accessories, while the import restriction applies only to earlier capital-goods components and spar...
Constitutional judicial review permits challenges to ECIRs and connected money-laundering proceedings where coercive action affects fundamental intere...
The HC held that the impugned proceedings under s.73(9) were vitiated by defective communication of the show-cause notice and by the Proper Officer's failure to afford the statutory hearing mandated by s.75(4); uploading the notice only under an "additional" tab did not constitute valid service under the WBGST/CGST regime, and the petitioner was shown to have had sufficient cause for non-reply. The court declined to sustain any time-bar refusal and granted the petitioner a final opportunity to file a reply to the show-cause notice, directing fresh adjudication after affording the requisite opportunity of hearing; the petition was disposed accordingly.
The HC held that the impugned proceedings under s.73(9) were vitiated by defective communication of the show-cause notice and by the Proper Officer's failure to afford the statutory hearing mandated by s.75(4); uploading the notice only under an "additional" tab did not constitute valid service under the WBGST/CGST regime, and the petitioner was shown to have had sufficient cause for non-reply. The court declined to sustain any time-bar refusal and granted the petitioner a final opportunity to file a reply to the show-cause notice, directing fresh adjudication after affording the requisite opportunity of hearing; the petition was disposed accordingly.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.