Madras High Court held that order is passed based on non-response to notice and hearing notice by the petitioner. Accordingly, order quashed with direction to the petitioner to deposit 25% of the disputed tax and direction to department to grant one more opportunity.
Madras High Court held that once the genuinity of the transaction is proved by the petitioner before this Court, there is no necessity for remanding the matter back to the respondents. Accordingly, addition towards unexplained investment set aside.
Madras High Court held that notice and order thereof issued for A.Y. 2021-22 instead of 2018-19 in form DRC-01 is liable to be quashed. Accordingly, matter remanded back for passing fresh order on merits.
A notice in Form DRC-01 was issued by the respondent on 28.12.2023. The petitioner filed reply to the said notice on 20.02.2024. Without affording an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner, the assessment order came to be passed on 26.04.2024.
Madras HC rules packing material for honey bees is part of composite supply, setting aside tax demands against Tvl. Vibis Natural Bee Farms.
Madras High Court directs the State Tax Officer to resolve rectification applications under GST Section 161 within three months, ensuring compliance with legal time limits.
Madras High Court held that passing of ex-parte order prematurely before expiry of time limit for filing reply and without granting personal hearing is against the principle of natural justice and accordingly the order is set aside.
Where assessee was able to demonstrate that the transaction was included in the GSTR-1 Return as a zero-rated sale, the goods detained under Section 129(3) should be released provisionally.
Madras High Court sets aside order in Krith Enterprises case, citing lack of adequate personal hearing and directs reconsideration by tax authorities.
Madras High Court rules on Input Tax Credit denial in Umashankar Alloys case, directing a fresh order following GST law amendments.
