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...
High Court held that a mandatory three-month gap between issuance of a CGST show cause notice and passing of the adjudication order is required to secure principles of natural justice and the right to personal hearing; shortening that interval undermines service of the statement of demand, the assessee's self-assessment option and ability to obtain adjournments, and therefore renders orders passed within a shorter period unsustainable. Applying that principle, the court quashed and set aside the show cause notice issued on 15-5-2024 and the adjudication order dated 9-7-2024 as the gap was under three months.
High Court held that a mandatory three-month gap between issuance of a CGST show cause notice and passing of the adjudication order is required to secure principles of natural justice and the right to personal hearing; shortening that interval undermines service of the statement of demand, the assessee's self-assessment option and ability to obtain adjournments, and therefore renders orders passed within a shorter period unsustainable. Applying that principle, the court quashed and set aside the show cause notice issued on 15-5-2024 and the adjudication order dated 9-7-2024 as the gap was under three months.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.