Tax determination against deceased proprietor invalid where no notice to legal representative; appeal rejected without addressing jurisdictional defec...
Revocation of GST registration and permission to file blocked returns; conditional defreezing of bank accounts after security and instalment applicati...
Right to access seized electronic evidence: impugned adjudication treated as additional show cause notice, remand for fresh hearing and return of mate...
Revisability of return invalidation communications under tax procedure affirmed, impugned non revisional finding quashed and matter remitted for fresh...
Page of 4816
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
6481 to 6500 of 96301 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Writ jurisdiction against a show cause notice is not barred in all cases and may be invoked where there is patent lack of jurisdiction, abuse of process, non-application of mind or breach of natural justice; the High Court's refusal to entertain the challenge on maintainability alone was therefore unjustified. Under Section 37A FEMA, seizure depends on a substantive "reason to believe" that the foreign asset is held in contravention of Section 4, and refusal by the Competent Authority to confirm seizure is a considered finding that the threshold was not met. The High Court and the final adjudication order were set aside because they proceeded as if seizure had been confirmed and impaired the pending departmental appeal; the matter was restored to the show cause stage, with the appeal to be decided first.
Writ jurisdiction against a show cause notice is not barred in all cases and may be invoked where there is patent lack of jurisdiction, abuse of process, non-application of mind or breach of natural justice; the High Court's refusal to entertain the challenge on maintainability alone was therefore unjustified. Under Section 37A FEMA, seizure depends on a substantive "reason to believe" that the foreign asset is held in contravention of Section 4, and refusal by the Competent Authority to confirm seizure is a considered finding that the threshold was not met. The High Court and the final adjudication order were set aside because they proceeded as if seizure had been confirmed and impaired the pending departmental appeal; the matter was restored to the show cause stage, with the appeal to be decided first.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4816 
Join Channel 
