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...
Search-assessment proviso jurisdiction, time-barred valuation reports, and denial of cross-examination vitiate valuation-based and confession-based ad...
Page of 4811
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
5681 to 5700 of 96207 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
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 
TaxTMI 
of 4811 
Join Channel 
