Madras HC held that passing of order without providing opportunity of personal hearing is against principles of natural justice. Accordingly, order set aside and directed to provide an opportunity to the Petitioner to establish their case on merits.
Madras High Court held that since petitioner failed to respond to notice issued for mismatch between GSTR-3B and GSTR-2A and non-payment of interest, it is directed that opportunity to explain discrepancies will be granted on payment of 25% of disputed tax.
Madras High Court held that in terms of section 245I, the Settlement Commission cannot re-open its concluded proceedings by invoking section 154 of the Act so as to levy interest under section 234B of the Income Tax Act.
Madras High Court held that Article 226 of the Constitution doesn’t permit Court to decide the dispute between two private parties. Accordingly, writ dismissed with liberty to petitioner to avail civil remedy.
Held that the impugned order dated 29.08.2024 is set aside and the petitioner shall deposit 10% of the disputed tax within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
Madras High Court held that expenditure claimed as capital expenditure cannot be claimed as revenue expenditure in the computation of income. Accordingly, appeal filed by the assessee dismissed.
Madras High Court held that section 16(5) of the GST Act should be considered while disallowing Input Tax Credit clam beyond period prescribed under section 16(4) of the GST Act. Thus, directed to re-do assessment.
Madras High Court directed petitioner to deposit 10% of the disputed tax amount in case of ex-parte order passed. In case the amount is paid, the order of assessment shall be treated as show cause notice and the petitioner shall submit its objections.
The Madras High Court held that an order issued without notice violates natural justice in the case of Tvl. Spark Bio Gas Pvt. Ltd. v. State Tax Officer (FAC).
Madras High Court sets aside GST assessment order for L&T Finance citing lack of personal hearing and directs reconsideration with proper opportunity to present evidence.
