Tariff classification determines GST schedule and rate; beverages in Schedule III attract the higher rate, tea extracts and syrups in Schedule I attra...
Fraudulent trading requires cogent evidence of intent to defraud; ordinary-course payments protected, except post-insolvency withdrawals must be resto...
Religious purpose exclusion versus charitable purpose: non overriding religious objects do not attract Explanation 3, registration directed under sect...
HC set aside an ex parte adjudication under Section 73 where the show cause notice raised factual disputes on return mismatches, excess input tax credit, supplier default, delayed tax payment and related interest. It held that the petitioner had to be heard on merits before such discrepancies were decided, especially where the petitioner claimed material existed to rebut the alleged defaults. Because allowing the order to stand would cause serious financial prejudice, the matter was remitted for fresh adjudication after affording an opportunity to respond, and the consequential bank attachment was directed to be withdrawn.
HC set aside an ex parte adjudication under Section 73 where the show cause notice raised factual disputes on return mismatches, excess input tax credit, supplier default, delayed tax payment and related interest. It held that the petitioner had to be heard on merits before such discrepancies were decided, especially where the petitioner claimed material existed to rebut the alleged defaults. Because allowing the order to stand would cause serious financial prejudice, the matter was remitted for fresh adjudication after affording an opportunity to respond, and the consequential bank attachment was directed to be withdrawn.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.