Madras High Court held that there is difference of more than 1 ½ year between the date of the assessment order and date of dispatch of the assessment order. Further, order was passed without granting of personal hearing. Such impugned order is liable to be quashed.
Madras High Court held that impugned order was passed after granting of personal hearing, however, personal hearing was granted before replies were received from the assessee is liable to be quashed on the grounds of principles of natural justice.
Madras High Court held that it is seen from the impugned assessment order that no personal hearing has been afforded to the petitioner. Accordingly, the impugned assessment order is quashed on the ground of violation of principles of natural justice.
Madras High Court held that writ petition not entertained as petitioner failed to make use of opportunities granted by the department to respond to the notices.
Assessee directed by Madras HC to file representation for release of blocked funds w.r.t. alleged non-payment of GST & excess ITC availment
Kramski Stamping and Molding Indis Private Ltd. Vs State Tax Officer (Int.) (Madras High Court) Madras High Court held that writ petition cannot be entertained as due procedure is followed by the department and there is no violation of principles of natural justice. Petitioner directed/ permitted to file a statutory appeal if aggrieved by the […]
Dr. Mathew Cherian Vs ACIT (Madras High Court) Facts of the Case: 1. There was a survey in Kovai Medical Centre and Hospital (in short KMCH or hospital) by the officials of the Income Tax Department, on 11.2021. In the course of the survey, various documents were found and seized that, according to the respondents, […]
Madras High Court directed the petitioner to submit an additional reply to the Show Cause Notice issued under section 174 of the Central Goods and Service Tax Act 2017.
Madras High Court held that assessment order passed without considering important submission by the petitioner is a non-speaking order and against the principles of natural justice. Accordingly, the assessment order is quashed and remanded back for fresh consideration.
K Ponmudi Vs ACIT (Madras High Court) The petitioner has challenged the impugned assessment order on the following grounds: a) Despite several requests made by the petitioner to the respondents, requesting them to furnish the evidence based on which they have found that M/s. SRS Mining is alleged to have paid Rs.20,00,000/- as illegal payments […]
