Political contribution deductions require recipient party compliance with contribution-reporting conditions; banking-channel donations alone do not qu...
Aggregation under TNMM prevents selective testing of intra-group services without comparable uncontrolled transactions, while appellate additional cla...
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...
Retrospective cancellation of GST registration is permissible only if the taxpayer is specifically put on notice that such retrospective action is proposed and is given the statutory minimum time to respond. Here, the original show cause notice did not propose retrospective cancellation, and the later communication introducing that proposal did not comply with Rule 22 of the CGST Rules because no seven working days were allowed from service of notice. The same-day retrospective cancellation was therefore contrary to Rule 22 and violative of fair procedure. The HC set aside the cancellation order, while leaving the authorities free to begin fresh proceedings in accordance with law.
Retrospective cancellation of GST registration is permissible only if the taxpayer is specifically put on notice that such retrospective action is proposed and is given the statutory minimum time to respond. Here, the original show cause notice did not propose retrospective cancellation, and the later communication introducing that proposal did not comply with Rule 22 of the CGST Rules because no seven working days were allowed from service of notice. The same-day retrospective cancellation was therefore contrary to Rule 22 and violative of fair procedure. The HC set aside the cancellation order, while leaving the authorities free to begin fresh proceedings in accordance with law.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4827 
Join Channel 
