Common portal notice after GST registration cancellation was insufficient; physical service and hearing were required before adjudication could procee...
A GST assessment confirming tax was set aside only to the extent of defect No. 1, because the assessee had not filed a proper reply with supporting documents to substantiate its exemption claim. The High Court noted that the adjudicating authority was not at fault for acting within the statutory timeline under Section 73, but balanced the interests of both sides by ordering de novo adjudication limited to that defect. The assessee was required to deposit 5% of the disputed tax and file the requisite documents, after which a fresh order on merits would be passed and any bank attachment would stand vacated on compliance.
A GST assessment confirming tax was set aside only to the extent of defect No. 1, because the assessee had not filed a proper reply with supporting documents to substantiate its exemption claim. The High Court noted that the adjudicating authority was not at fault for acting within the statutory timeline under Section 73, but balanced the interests of both sides by ordering de novo adjudication limited to that defect. The assessee was required to deposit 5% of the disputed tax and file the requisite documents, after which a fresh order on merits would be passed and any bank attachment would stand vacated on compliance.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4809 
Join Channel 
