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...
HC held that the statutory mandate of personal hearing under Section 75(4) could not be displaced by the petitioner's earlier indication in Form GST DRC-06 declining such hearing. Once an adverse order was proposed, the authority was required to grant a further opportunity of hearing before final adjudication. As no hearing was afforded, the order was vitiated by breach of natural justice and was set aside without examining the merits of the demand. The matter was remanded for fresh decision after giving the required opportunity of hearing within the time fixed by the Court.
HC held that the statutory mandate of personal hearing under Section 75(4) could not be displaced by the petitioner's earlier indication in Form GST DRC-06 declining such hearing. Once an adverse order was proposed, the authority was required to grant a further opportunity of hearing before final adjudication. As no hearing was afforded, the order was vitiated by breach of natural justice and was set aside without examining the merits of the demand. The matter was remanded for fresh decision after giving the required opportunity of hearing within the time fixed by the Court.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.