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...
The HC declined to quash a GST show cause notice at the writ stage, holding that interference under Article 226 is confined to exceptional cases where the notice is wholly without jurisdiction or facially illegal. The earlier classification ruling in the petitioner's own case did not conclude the present demand because the notice rested on a different foundation and on material gathered in enquiry, including the petitioner's documents. Questions on bifurcation, supply character, applicable rate and limitation were matters for reply before the proper officer, not writ review. The petition was dismissed with liberty to respond to the notice within four weeks, and all merits objections were kept open.
The HC declined to quash a GST show cause notice at the writ stage, holding that interference under Article 226 is confined to exceptional cases where the notice is wholly without jurisdiction or facially illegal. The earlier classification ruling in the petitioner's own case did not conclude the present demand because the notice rested on a different foundation and on material gathered in enquiry, including the petitioner's documents. Questions on bifurcation, supply character, applicable rate and limitation were matters for reply before the proper officer, not writ review. The petition was dismissed with liberty to respond to the notice within four weeks, and all merits objections were kept open.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4816 
Join Channel 
