Unlawful outward remittances via Hawala using proforma invoices and electronic records proved; documents admitted, directors penalised, penalties redu...
Attachment of equivalent-value properties as proceeds of crime upheld; preventive attachment order and confirmation sustained; no independent ED reinv...
Broker trading-system "technical glitch" redefinition and narrowed incident-reporting regime for large IBT/STWT brokers requiring 2-hr notice and 14-w...
Adjudication proceeded on a basis different from the grounds specified in the show-cause notice, breaching Section 75(7) of the GST Act which proscribes confirming demand on any ground other than those stated; consequence: the impugned orders could not stand. The adjudicating authority relied on invoice treatment under forward charge to treat supplies as taxable under reverse charge, a new basis not pleaded in the notice; consequence: that reasoning was found improper. Reliance on GST back-office data may deprive affected persons of effective opportunity to reply; consequence: proceedings must be reheard after affording a proper opportunity and reconsideration, leading to remand of the matter.
Adjudication proceeded on a basis different from the grounds specified in the show-cause notice, breaching Section 75(7) of the GST Act which proscribes confirming demand on any ground other than those stated; consequence: the impugned orders could not stand. The adjudicating authority relied on invoice treatment under forward charge to treat supplies as taxable under reverse charge, a new basis not pleaded in the notice; consequence: that reasoning was found improper. Reliance on GST back-office data may deprive affected persons of effective opportunity to reply; consequence: proceedings must be reheard after affording a proper opportunity and reconsideration, leading to remand of the matter.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4814 
Join Channel 
