Proportionate interest, unexplained credits and partner remuneration disputed; proofs of fund nexus and lender identity were decisive and disallowance...
Capital gains valuation from stamp assessment versus net consideration for residential reinvestment: deemed stamp value replaced for gains but not for...
Failure to grant the statutory personal hearing under Section 75(4) vitiated the proceedings, because a taxpayer's statement in Form GST DRC-06 that no hearing was required could not override the statutory mandate. Once the authority did not accept the reply, it was bound to afford the prescribed hearing opportunity and could not decide the matter on the first date fixed for hearing. As three opportunities of personal hearing were not granted, the order was held to breach both the statute and principles of natural justice. The HC quashed the order and remanded the matter for fresh adjudication after giving the required hearing.
Failure to grant the statutory personal hearing under Section 75(4) vitiated the proceedings, because a taxpayer's statement in Form GST DRC-06 that no hearing was required could not override the statutory mandate. Once the authority did not accept the reply, it was bound to afford the prescribed hearing opportunity and could not decide the matter on the first date fixed for hearing. As three opportunities of personal hearing were not granted, the order was held to breach both the statute and principles of natural justice. The HC quashed the order and remanded the matter for fresh adjudication after giving the required hearing.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4817 
Join Channel 
