Duplicate PAN cancellation timeframe requires prior administrative representation before judicial intervention, ensuring a time-bound decision on the ...
Natural justice and pre-CIRP labour awards protect termination compensation, permitting withdrawal of court deposits despite later insolvency resoluti...
Arbitration of SEZ sub-lease monetary claims preserves rent, maintenance, termination, improvements and damages disputes while unused premises are vac...
Scientific research approval grants a research association tax recognition, subject to annual donor reporting, certification, and regulatory complianc...
HC held that a show-cause notice issued under s.130 of the UPGST Act, 2017, before any adjudication of tax liability under ss.73/74, contravenes s.35 and is therefore jurisdictionally defective. The court quashed and set aside the s.122 read with s.130 notice and the impugned adjudicatory order dated 17.09.2025, and also quashed the seizure order dated 06.09.2025. The petition is disposed. The revenue is left at liberty to initiate fresh proceedings consonant with statutory prescription by issuing show-cause notices under the appropriate substantive provisions of the Act, 2017, after determining tax liability in accordance with law.
HC held that a show-cause notice issued under s.130 of the UPGST Act, 2017, before any adjudication of tax liability under ss.73/74, contravenes s.35 and is therefore jurisdictionally defective. The court quashed and set aside the s.122 read with s.130 notice and the impugned adjudicatory order dated 17.09.2025, and also quashed the seizure order dated 06.09.2025. The petition is disposed. The revenue is left at liberty to initiate fresh proceedings consonant with statutory prescription by issuing show-cause notices under the appropriate substantive provisions of the Act, 2017, after determining tax liability in accordance with law.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4888 
