Protective assessment cannot duplicate identical receipts under competing characterisations; remote services did not establish a taxable permanent est...
Current account treatment of overseas tournament services removed most FEMA findings, but excess EEFC remittance and delayed repatriation remained bre...
Modification of bail conditions remains available through inherent jurisdiction where onerous deposits undermine justice and cannot recover disputed d...
Merchant banker regulation consolidates registration, governance, capital, reporting, outsourcing and investor-protection requirements under an update...
High Court held that initiation of proceedings under Section 74 requires issuance of a formal show cause notice stating reasons and that a summary in Form GST DRC-01 with an attached statement of determination cannot substitute for the SCN mandated by Section 74 read with Rule 142(1)(a); initiation without a proper SCN was contrary to law. The Court also found that an opportunity of hearing prescribed by Section 75(4) must be granted before an adverse order; failure to afford a hearing vitiated the impugned order. The impugned order was set aside, liberty granted to initiate de novo proceedings, and the interregnum excluded for limitation calculation.
High Court held that initiation of proceedings under Section 74 requires issuance of a formal show cause notice stating reasons and that a summary in Form GST DRC-01 with an attached statement of determination cannot substitute for the SCN mandated by Section 74 read with Rule 142(1)(a); initiation without a proper SCN was contrary to law. The Court also found that an opportunity of hearing prescribed by Section 75(4) must be granted before an adverse order; failure to afford a hearing vitiated the impugned order. The impugned order was set aside, liberty granted to initiate de novo proceedings, and the interregnum excluded for limitation calculation.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4790
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
