Rectification of mistake remains limited to self-evident record errors, preventing merits review through miscellaneous applications and preserving fin...
Tender creditworthiness conditions may extend to de facto Promoter Directors, with post-participation challenges generally barred absent arbitrariness...
Corporate representation in PMLA summons proceedings permitted through an authorised signatory, subject to directors' continuing cooperation and atten...
Helicopter charter classification requires effective control analysis, while territorial performance, reasoned credit orders and wilful suppression de...
Specified fund definition expands PAN exemption eligibility for registered alternative investment funds and qualifying International Financial Service...
Tax exemption for specified legal-services authority income applies retrospectively, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and...
Page of 4817
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
1201 to 1220 of 96333 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
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fresh adjudication after affording an opportunity to respond, and the consequential bank attachment was directed to be withdrawn.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fresh adjudication after affording an opportunity to respond, and the consequential bank attachment was directed to be withdrawn.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.