Charitable trust registration requires a specified-violation notice; settled cash deposits and related-party payments did not justify cancellation or ...
External development charges trigger TDS under section 194C, while disputed administrative payments require factual verification and fresh adjudicatio...
Section 270AA penalty immunity requires identified statutory defaults and a hearing before rejection; reassessment disclosure may constitute under-rep...
Section 80JJAA employee-cost deduction allowed for deployed staff but barred against transfer-pricing income enhancement, with pricing issues remanded...
Transfer-pricing methodology protects commercially genuine associated-enterprise payments, while pre-2016 secondary adjustments and related notional i...
Negative liens over operating assets can constitute international transactions requiring arm's-length pricing reflecting restricted borrowing and expa...
Cross-examination rights in Customs Broker revocation inquiries require witness examination; procedural denial may be cured through fresh adjudication...
The dominant issues were whether the adjudication confirming GST demand was vitiated by (i) denial of a statutorily mandated personal hearing under Section 75(4) and (ii) lack of jurisdiction under Section 75(7) in confirming demand beyond the show cause notice. The authority held that once a personal hearing is specifically requested, Section 75(4) imposes a mandatory duty to grant it; passing an ex parte order despite such request is a fatal breach of natural justice and cannot be cured by later merits review, rendering the order unsustainable. It further held that any final demand exceeding the amount proposed in the show cause notice is ultra vires under Section 75(7), vitiating the order. The adjudication and appellate orders were quashed and the matter remanded. - HC
The dominant issues were whether the adjudication confirming GST demand was vitiated by (i) denial of a statutorily mandated personal hearing under Section 75(4) and (ii) lack of jurisdiction under Section 75(7) in confirming demand beyond the show cause notice. The authority held that once a personal hearing is specifically requested, Section 75(4) imposes a mandatory duty to grant it; passing an ex parte order despite such request is a fatal breach of natural justice and cannot be cured by later merits review, rendering the order unsustainable. It further held that any final demand exceeding the amount proposed in the show cause notice is ultra vires under Section 75(7), vitiating the order. The adjudication and appellate orders were quashed and the matter remanded. - HC
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
