Inherited property sale proceeds require capital-gains treatment where ownership is supported by evidence, not suspicion or unverified signature doubt...
Cross-examination of retracted statements is essential where foundational evidence supports a benami allegation and documented funding explanations re...
Capital-goods exemption covers plant-modernisation accessories, while the import restriction applies only to earlier capital-goods components and spar...
Constitutional judicial review permits challenges to ECIRs and connected money-laundering proceedings where coercive action affects fundamental intere...
The dominant issue was whether multiple tax periods/financial years could be clubbed in a single/composite show cause notice under Sections 73/74 of the CGST/KGST Act. Relying on its earlier precedent, the Court held that such clubbing/consolidation/bunching is illegal, invalid, impermissible, and without jurisdiction, being contrary to the CGST/KGST Act; consequently, the composite show cause notice and its addendum were quashed. All consequential communications, the subsequent orders including the order-in-original, and all further proceedings pursuant to the impugned notice were also quashed, and the writ petition was allowed. - HC
The dominant issue was whether multiple tax periods/financial years could be clubbed in a single/composite show cause notice under Sections 73/74 of the CGST/KGST Act. Relying on its earlier precedent, the Court held that such clubbing/consolidation/bunching is illegal, invalid, impermissible, and without jurisdiction, being contrary to the CGST/KGST Act; consequently, the composite show cause notice and its addendum were quashed. All consequential communications, the subsequent orders including the order-in-original, and all further proceedings pursuant to the impugned notice were also quashed, and the writ petition was allowed. - HC
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.