Explore the recent ruling by the Madras High Court in N. Kannammal vs. Assessment Unit, highlighting the petitioner’s challenge against an unjust assessment order under Income Tax Act, 1961, dated 07.12.2022, and the court’s directive for a fresh consideration, emphasizing procedural fairness and natural justice.
In TSN Old Iron Scrap Merchants vs. Deputy Commissioner case, Andhra Pradesh High Court rules non-appearance at GST hearing doesn’t violate natural justice.
Kerala High Court held that as importer-seller classified the HSN 8443 3100, the purchaser/re-seller cannot be said to have wilfully classified the machines under a wrong head with the intention to evade payment of correct/higher rate of tax. Hence, penalty unsustainable.
The Court observed that Section 75(4) explicitly requires an opportunity of hearing when an adverse decision is anticipated. Considering that both tax and penalties were imposed, and an adverse decision was contemplated, the Court held that the department was obligated to provide a hearing.
Explore the Madras High Court’s decision in Peter Tyres v. Assistant Commissioner of CGST & Excise, where a writ petition was dismissed due to the availability of statutory remedies. Learn about the rejection of Input Tax Credit and the court’s stance on discretionary jurisdiction. Know your options in similar situations.
Read the detailed analysis of the Calcutta High Court judgment in Narendra Tea Company vs. Union of India, allowing the 100% EOU’s duty drawback claim on bulk tea.
Delhi High Court ruling favors taxpayer against retrospective GST registration cancellation. Detailed analysis of the order, implications, and next steps in this legal battle.
Allahabad High Court rules on CGST registration cancellation – adequate notice must be served, not just portal uploading. Detailed analysis and implications.
Explore the Patna High Court’s judgment on Raj Kumar Sao Kishori Lal Sao vs. State of Bihar regarding ‘Korai’ taxation. Detailed analysis of purchase tax and cattle feed status.
Gauhati High Court held that industrial units which was not required to be registered under the Central Excise Act, either due to low threshold limit or as manufacturing goods that were exempted, cannot be denied benefit of budgetary support scheme.
