Transitioned CENVAT credit may validly satisfy mandatory pre-deposit requirements for legacy service tax appeals through Electronic Credit Ledger debi...
Building-plan sanction charges require statutory authority; unauthorised fees and GST were quashed, while labour cess must follow prescribed collectio...
Pure-agent exclusion fails where hotel booking facilitators receive third-party services themselves, making entire customer consideration taxable as r...
Transfer pricing requires evidence for AMP transactions, functionally reliable comparables, and appropriate aggregation or Berry Ratio benchmarking me...
Revisionary jurisdiction cannot reopen share capital assessments where adequate inquiry supports a permissible view and no independent error is establ...
Reassessment jurisdiction fails where unverified portal information is aggregated without examining the taxpayer's explanation or relevance of entries...
Statutory sanction for delayed reassessment requires approval from the prescribed authority; approval by an inferior authority invalidates jurisdictio...
Provisional attachment of a bank account under section 83 is a drastic power that can be exercised only on a prior, valid formation of opinion based on tangible material and after compliance with mandatory procedural safeguards. The pre-attachment communication and attachment order were vague, issued without a show cause notice, and disclosed no proper material or reasoning; the attachment therefore breached the petitioner's civil rights and was unlawful. The High Court quashed the attachment orders but permitted the authorities to proceed afresh in accordance with law if tangible material exists. Finding a gross abuse of power and high-handed conduct causing serious civil consequences, the Court also imposed personal costs on the concerned officer.
Provisional attachment of a bank account under section 83 is a drastic power that can be exercised only on a prior, valid formation of opinion based on tangible material and after compliance with mandatory procedural safeguards. The pre-attachment communication and attachment order were vague, issued without a show cause notice, and disclosed no proper material or reasoning; the attachment therefore breached the petitioner's civil rights and was unlawful. The High Court quashed the attachment orders but permitted the authorities to proceed afresh in accordance with law if tangible material exists. Finding a gross abuse of power and high-handed conduct causing serious civil consequences, the Court also imposed personal costs on the concerned officer.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4821 
Join Channel 
