Admissibility of electronic evidence bars undervaluation demands where printouts, retracted statements and no cross-examination leave the case unprove...
Limitation in oppression and mismanagement proceedings: prior knowledge of removal and dilution barred the challenge, with valuation directions upheld...
Insolvency professional agency governance rules amended to add nominee directors, tighten independent director eligibility, and regulate managing dire...
An adjudication order confirming a demand under a show cause notice cannot stand where the authority fails to consider the taxpayer's replies and gives no cogent reasons for rejection. The High Court found complete non-application of mind because the order relied on an unexplained assumption that the matter was sub judice on merits, did not identify the supplies treated as taxable or tax-free after considering the circulars cited, and omitted discussion of all replies. The impugned order was quashed, with liberty to proceed afresh on the notice after considering all replies and granting a fresh hearing.
An adjudication order confirming a demand under a show cause notice cannot stand where the authority fails to consider the taxpayer's replies and gives no cogent reasons for rejection. The High Court found complete non-application of mind because the order relied on an unexplained assumption that the matter was sub judice on merits, did not identify the supplies treated as taxable or tax-free after considering the circulars cited, and omitted discussion of all replies. The impugned order was quashed, with liberty to proceed afresh on the notice after considering all replies and granting a fresh hearing.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
