Madras High Court remitted the matter back for fresh consideration in the matter of denial of Input Tax Credit (ITC) on Zero Rated Sales effected under section 18 of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax (TNVAT) Act, 2006.
Madras High Court issues interim orders in A. Venkatachalam vs Assistant Commissioner case on GST levy on royalty, awaiting decision by Supreme Court’s Constitution Bench.
Merely uploading notices and orders under View Additional Notices & Orders section without direct communication to taxpayer did not amount to proper service of SCN.
Petitioner submits that the respondent issued an ASMT-10 notice dated 03.07.2023, indicating a mismatch between the amounts in FORM 26AS and FORM GSTR-1, which comes to Rs.69 lakhs.
Madras High Court held that order confirming tax liability and imposing penalty on ground of mismatch of input tax claim between GSTR-3B and GSTR-2A set aside as order passed without giving opportunity of being heard.
Madras High Court held that benefit of section 10B of the Income Tax Act available even before setting off of unabsorbed depreciation and brought-forward losses. Accordingly, matter decided in favour of assessee.
Madras High Court held that order set aside as petitioner was unaware of notices being uploaded on GST common portal. Accordingly, respondent directed to pass fresh order on merits.
The Madras High Court set aside an order against G. Anand for tax discrepancies, directing a detailed review and personal hearing by the Assistant Commissioner.
Madras High Court held that issuance of order without providing an opportunity of personal hearing is against the principles of natural justice and accordingly the order is liable to be set aside.
The GST registration was cancelled due to non- filing of returns for a period of six months. Assessee argued that, due to health issues, assessee relied on his accountant to file returns, but later discovered they were not filed on time.
