CKD/SKD air-conditioner components classifiable with finished units by essential character; prior advance ruling extended three years, FTA benefits po...
Scope of judicial review under Article 226: supervisory, not appellate; factual reappraisal barred, challenge dismissed; insolvency professional dutie...
Courier transshipment of imported goods via named carrier to air cargo stations renewed until 30.01.2026; exemption conditional, strict controls apply...
HC held that the Adjudicating Authority violated principles of natural justice by passing the Order-in-Original without affording the assessee a proper personal hearing. The portal entries and note did not specify the mandatory particulars of personal hearing, namely date, time and venue, as required during ongoing proceedings under section 75(5), including before passing any adverse order. As this procedural lapse vitiated the adjudication, the impugned order dated 28.08.2024 and the appellate order dated 06.03.2025 were quashed and set aside. The matter was remanded, directing the Adjudicating Authority to duly intimate the assessee of the date and time of personal hearing and proceed afresh in accordance with law.
HC held that the Adjudicating Authority violated principles of natural justice by passing the Order-in-Original without affording the assessee a proper personal hearing. The portal entries and note did not specify the mandatory particulars of personal hearing, namely date, time and venue, as required during ongoing proceedings under section 75(5), including before passing any adverse order. As this procedural lapse vitiated the adjudication, the impugned order dated 28.08.2024 and the appellate order dated 06.03.2025 were quashed and set aside. The matter was remanded, directing the Adjudicating Authority to duly intimate the assessee of the date and time of personal hearing and proceed afresh in accordance with law.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4827 
Join Channel 
