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...
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 4821 
Join Channel 
