Credit-note turnover adjustments preserve inverted-duty refunds, while ministerial re-computation does not constitute an impermissible appellate reman...
Revisional jurisdiction over export quota premium deductions requires both error and Revenue prejudice; a permissible assessment view cannot be displa...
Recovery proceedings were initiated under s.79(1)(f) pursuant to an order under s.73 of the KGST Act, 2017, passed after the noticee failed to file a reply to the show-cause notice or contest the proceedings. The court held that where non-participation is pleaded to be due to bona fide reasons, unavoidable circumstances, and sufficient cause, a justice-oriented approach warrants affording one final opportunity. Accordingly, the adjudication order dated 07.05.2024 was set aside and the matter was remitted to the authority for fresh consideration from the stage of filing reply to the notice dated 28.02.2024, subject to payment of costs. - HC
Recovery proceedings were initiated under s.79(1)(f) pursuant to an order under s.73 of the KGST Act, 2017, passed after the noticee failed to file a reply to the show-cause notice or contest the proceedings. The court held that where non-participation is pleaded to be due to bona fide reasons, unavoidable circumstances, and sufficient cause, a justice-oriented approach warrants affording one final opportunity. Accordingly, the adjudication order dated 07.05.2024 was set aside and the matter was remitted to the authority for fresh consideration from the stage of filing reply to the notice dated 28.02.2024, subject to payment of costs. - HC
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.