<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>Court Upholds GST Assessment Orders; Finds No Oversight in Consideration of Submitted Documents by Petitioner.</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=75800</link>
    <description>Demand of GST - Validity of assessment orders - The petitioner contended that they provided all relevant documents, including those related to land transactions, during the assessment process. They argued that project details were submitted during rectification proceedings. - After examining the evidence and submissions, the court noted that the assessing officer had considered the petitioner&#039;s documents and entered findings based on such evidence. The court concluded that a reasonable opportunity was provided to the petitioner, and the assessment orders were not a result of non-application of mind. Therefore, the court found no grounds for interference in its discretionary jurisdiction.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 18 Mar 2024 07:57:08 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 18 Mar 2024 07:57:08 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=747314" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Court Upholds GST Assessment Orders; Finds No Oversight in Consideration of Submitted Documents by Petitioner.</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=75800</link>
      <description>Demand of GST - Validity of assessment orders - The petitioner contended that they provided all relevant documents, including those related to land transactions, during the assessment process. They argued that project details were submitted during rectification proceedings. - After examining the evidence and submissions, the court noted that the assessing officer had considered the petitioner&#039;s documents and entered findings based on such evidence. The court concluded that a reasonable opportunity was provided to the petitioner, and the assessment orders were not a result of non-application of mind. Therefore, the court found no grounds for interference in its discretionary jurisdiction.</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 18 Mar 2024 07:57:08 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=75800</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>