Fraud classification show-cause notices founded on inconclusive forensic audit material cannot sustain action, permitting fresh proceedings on conclus...
Appellate enhancement limits protect against new income sources, while documented credits and prior-year investments resist unexplained-income additio...
Where CGST authorities have already initiated proceedings on a given subject matter, the State GST authorities lack jurisdiction to commence parallel/dual proceedings on the same subject matter, being barred by Section 6(2)(b) of the CGST Act. Applying this statutory bar and the binding principle that only the originally seized GST authority can proceed further in accordance with law, the subsequent State-initiated show-cause notice and adjudication actions were held not maintainable. Consequently, the impugned State show-cause notice, order-in-original, adjudication order, and summary orders were quashed and the writ petition was allowed. - HC
Where CGST authorities have already initiated proceedings on a given subject matter, the State GST authorities lack jurisdiction to commence parallel/dual proceedings on the same subject matter, being barred by Section 6(2)(b) of the CGST Act. Applying this statutory bar and the binding principle that only the originally seized GST authority can proceed further in accordance with law, the subsequent State-initiated show-cause notice and adjudication actions were held not maintainable. Consequently, the impugned State show-cause notice, order-in-original, adjudication order, and summary orders were quashed and the writ petition was allowed. - HC
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4881 
