Karnataka High Court quashes Sec 148A(d), Sec 148 notice and ex-parte assessment due to non-receipt of Sec 148A(b) notice; remands for fresh reply, keeps all issues open.
Karnataka High Court sets aside Sec 154 rectification, remands Sec 54 exemption claim for fresh review; validity of Sec 154 left open, assessee to appear before AO without notice.
The issue was whether a show cause notice could be issued under a rule already omitted. The court stayed the notice, holding that the jurisdictional challenge requires further examination.
The issue was whether a reassessment notice issued by a jurisdictional officer instead of a faceless officer is valid. The Court held it to be a fatal defect and quashed the notice.
The Court ruled that temporary business inactivity due to genuine medical reasons cannot justify cancellation without proper consideration. The impugned orders were declared arbitrary and set aside.
The Court held that challenges to ITC blocking cannot be entertained at the show cause stage. It ruled that adjudication must first take place based on facts and evidence.
The court held that issuing a single show cause notice for multiple financial years violates GST law. It ruled such “bunching” is impermissible and directed fresh year-wise notices.
The court held that the rectification order failed to satisfy the statutory requirements under Section 161 of the CGST Act. The impugned order was quashed, directing issuance of a fresh speaking order after considering the taxpayer’s reply.
The issue involved taxing capital gains from a development agreement in multiple years. The court held the same income cannot be taxed twice and set aside the addition subject to verification.
The Court held that recovery under Section 79 is valid when the assessment has attained finality and dues remain unpaid. It ruled that no prior notice or fresh adjudication is required in such cases.
