Arrest safeguards and transit remand requirements invalidated detention following inter-State transfer without communicated grounds or magistrate auth...
Arrest safeguards require disclosed grounds, relative intimation and transit remand, while duplicate prosecution under the CGST framework is unsustain...
Document Identification Number defects can invalidate GST assessments, with delayed challenges entertained conditionally where patent irregularities e...
Windmill commissioning evidence supported higher depreciation where grid connection and electricity generation proved operational use before the relev...
Pharmaceutical promotion and transfer-pricing comparability principles limited disallowances, while uncorroborated search allegations and unsupported ...
Business expenditure substantiation supports scrap credits, statutory payments and expense claims, while depreciation requires proof of actual busines...
HC examined the challenge to a SCN issued u/s 74 of the CGST Act for recovery of tax, interest and penalty, where the petitioner contended absence of allegations of fraud and non-fulfilment of statutory ingredients. HC reiterated that though writ jurisdiction under Art. 226 can be invoked even at the SCN stage, such interference is warranted only when the notice is shown to be null for want of jurisdiction or issued by an incompetent authority. Finding no inherent lack of jurisdiction or incompetence in the issuing authority, HC declined to entertain the petition against the SCN. Petition was disposed of, granting petitioner up to 15 days to file reply, and directing adjudication with due hearing.
HC examined the challenge to a SCN issued u/s 74 of the CGST Act for recovery of tax, interest and penalty, where the petitioner contended absence of allegations of fraud and non-fulfilment of statutory ingredients. HC reiterated that though writ jurisdiction under Art. 226 can be invoked even at the SCN stage, such interference is warranted only when the notice is shown to be null for want of jurisdiction or issued by an incompetent authority. Finding no inherent lack of jurisdiction or incompetence in the issuing authority, HC declined to entertain the petition against the SCN. Petition was disposed of, granting petitioner up to 15 days to file reply, and directing adjudication with due hearing.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.