Condonation of delay in filing GSTR-3B returns and entitlement to Section 62 benefit results in withdrawal of assessments and revocation of attachment...
Penalty for estimation of income and disallowances for tax non-deduction clarified: estimation-based penalties not sustainable; additions without conc...
Managerial remuneration disallowance under s.40A(2)(b) challenged over alleged tax-avoidance; appellate decision restored deletion of addition for dir...
An ex parte rejection of a GST refund claim without a deficiency memo and without affording a hearing was procedurally invalid, so the refund application had to be reconsidered in the manner prescribed by the rules. The Court noted that a subsequent refund application had been filed, a deficiency memo had been issued on that application, and it was required to be taken to its logical conclusion rather than denied on a pedantic view. The designated officer was directed to decide the refund application and related applications afresh under Rules 90 and 92, uninfluenced by the earlier rejection order or the appellate dismissal on limitation, with merits left open.
An ex parte rejection of a GST refund claim without a deficiency memo and without affording a hearing was procedurally invalid, so the refund application had to be reconsidered in the manner prescribed by the rules. The Court noted that a subsequent refund application had been filed, a deficiency memo had been issued on that application, and it was required to be taken to its logical conclusion rather than denied on a pedantic view. The designated officer was directed to decide the refund application and related applications afresh under Rules 90 and 92, uninfluenced by the earlier rejection order or the appellate dismissal on limitation, with merits left open.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4819 
Join Channel 
