Retrospective cancellation of charitable registration under section 12AB(4) was unsustainable; related-party benefit allegations did not prove nongenu...
Merger control notice and disclosure rules: Supreme Court limits penalties, rejects reopening of approved combination, and sets aside adverse findings...
An adjudication order was set aside because the authority failed to consider the taxpayer's replies and supporting documents on the alleged mismatch between GSTR-1 output tax and tax paid through GSTR-3B. The Court held that fresh consideration was required, with a new reply permitted, all submitted materials examined, and a personal hearing afforded before a fresh finding. It also clarified that verification from suppliers could be undertaken in accordance with law, but the authority could not travel beyond the show-cause notice. The matter was remitted for de novo adjudication, with merits left open.
An adjudication order was set aside because the authority failed to consider the taxpayer's replies and supporting documents on the alleged mismatch between GSTR-1 output tax and tax paid through GSTR-3B. The Court held that fresh consideration was required, with a new reply permitted, all submitted materials examined, and a personal hearing afforded before a fresh finding. It also clarified that verification from suppliers could be undertaken in accordance with law, but the authority could not travel beyond the show-cause notice. The matter was remitted for de novo adjudication, with merits left open.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.