Rectification of mistake remains limited to self-evident record errors, preventing merits review through miscellaneous applications and preserving fin...
Tender creditworthiness conditions may extend to de facto Promoter Directors, with post-participation challenges generally barred absent arbitrariness...
Corporate representation in PMLA summons proceedings permitted through an authorised signatory, subject to directors' continuing cooperation and atten...
Helicopter charter classification requires effective control analysis, while territorial performance, reasoned credit orders and wilful suppression de...
Specified fund definition expands PAN exemption eligibility for registered alternative investment funds and qualifying International Financial Service...
Page of 4794
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
741 to 760 of 95875 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
HC held that the tax and penalty demand under s.73 of the GST Act was illegally enhanced from Rs. 5,11,145.80 in the SCN to Rs. 38,60,604/- in the impugned order, in contravention of s.75(7), which bars adjudication beyond the scope and quantum specified in the SCN. Relying on a prior Division Bench ruling on identical facts, the HC reiterated that absence of proper opportunity, coupled with an excessive demand beyond the SCN, vitiates the adjudication. Finding the impugned orders unsustainable in law, the HC quashed the demand and consequential orders in their entirety. The writ petition filed by M/s X was accordingly allowed, with liberty to the department, if so advised, to proceed strictly in accordance with law and within the limits of the original SCN.
HC held that the tax and penalty demand under s.73 of the GST Act was illegally enhanced from Rs. 5,11,145.80 in the SCN to Rs. 38,60,604/- in the impugned order, in contravention of s.75(7), which bars adjudication beyond the scope and quantum specified in the SCN. Relying on a prior Division Bench ruling on identical facts, the HC reiterated that absence of proper opportunity, coupled with an excessive demand beyond the SCN, vitiates the adjudication. Finding the impugned orders unsustainable in law, the HC quashed the demand and consequential orders in their entirety. The writ petition filed by M/s X was accordingly allowed, with liberty to the department, if so advised, to proceed strictly in accordance with law and within the limits of the original SCN.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4794
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
