Genuineness of investment evidence determines LTCG entitlement; non specific regulatory reports cannot displace transaction specific documentary proof...
Page of 4816
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
5881 to 5900 of 96301 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
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.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4816 
Join Channel 
