Consultancy fees claimed as business expense-can tax disallowance rest on survey suspicion despite invoices, contracts and bank trail? Appeal dismisse...
Impugned orders concerning the discrepancy between Form GSTR-2A and GSTR-3B were governed as follows: the earlier order was held unsustainable due to duplication of proceedings resulting in double taxation and was quashed; the subsequent order was set aside for confirming assessment without affording a personal hearing and the matter was remanded for fresh consideration. The remand is conditional on the petitioner paying 25% of the disputed tax before invoking reconsideration, after which the assessing authority must permit filing of objections and afford a personal hearing. Operative effect: duplication corrected and procedural defect remedied by conditional remand.
Impugned orders concerning the discrepancy between Form GSTR-2A and GSTR-3B were governed as follows: the earlier order was held unsustainable due to duplication of proceedings resulting in double taxation and was quashed; the subsequent order was set aside for confirming assessment without affording a personal hearing and the matter was remanded for fresh consideration. The remand is conditional on the petitioner paying 25% of the disputed tax before invoking reconsideration, after which the assessing authority must permit filing of objections and afford a personal hearing. Operative effect: duplication corrected and procedural defect remedied by conditional remand.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4821 
Join Channel 
