Inventory write-off and fraudulent/wrongful trading allegations in corporate insolvency led to director liability principles applied and appeal dismis...
Condonation of delay in filing GSTR-3B returns and entitlement to Section 62 benefit results in withdrawal of assessments and revocation of attachment...
The HC held that a writ challenge to a GST DRC-01A intimation under Section 74(5) read with Rule 142(1A) was premature because the communication was only a pre-adjudication step. As no adjudication had yet occurred, and the proposed demand required factual examination including the special audit report, the dispute was not fit for writ interference. The department was directed to issue a show cause notice, grant a hearing, and pass a reasoned order. The petitioner may then pursue the statutory appellate remedy under Section 107 against the adjudicatory order, with all contentions left open.
The HC held that a writ challenge to a GST DRC-01A intimation under Section 74(5) read with Rule 142(1A) was premature because the communication was only a pre-adjudication step. As no adjudication had yet occurred, and the proposed demand required factual examination including the special audit report, the dispute was not fit for writ interference. The department was directed to issue a show cause notice, grant a hearing, and pass a reasoned order. The petitioner may then pursue the statutory appellate remedy under Section 107 against the adjudicatory order, with all contentions left open.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4816 
Join Channel 
