Income Tax : Courts have validated the faceless assessment framework while insisting on strict adherence to fairness. The key takeaway is that ...
Goods and Services Tax : The Court ruled that issuing an SCN before the pre-SCN reply period expires violates natural justice. The key takeaway is that aut...
Goods and Services Tax : The Court held that authorities must provide a personal hearing before issuing adverse GST orders under Section 73. Failure to fol...
CA, CS, CMA : Explains how electronic notices alone are insufficient for taxpayers lacking digital access, with courts holding such service inef...
Goods and Services Tax : Personal hearing is mandatory in GST adjudication under Section 75(4) before any adverse decision. Courts confirm PH is a non-nego...
Goods and Services Tax : The Orissa High Court set aside GST demand and rectification orders after finding that the taxpayer’s reply and request for pers...
Goods and Services Tax : The Telangana High Court set aside the appellate order rejecting the GST appeal and remanded the matter for fresh adjudication aft...
Goods and Services Tax : The Court observed that show cause notices had clearly provided opportunities for personal hearing and submission of documents. It...
Income Tax : The issue concerned taxation of alleged on-money from sale of land. The Tribunal held that once the land was agricultural and outs...
Goods and Services Tax : The case examined whether a GST authority can reject a rectification application without granting a hearing. The High Court set as...
The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)’s exercise of newly amended powers under Section 251(1)(a) to set aside an ex-parte order passed under Section 144. Since the assessee was denied due opportunity, the matter was remanded for reassessment. The ruling clarifies that appellate authorities can now direct fresh assessments where procedural fairness was lacking.
The Tribunal remanded the case for de novo assessment to verify the reporting of cash deposits made during demonetisation under the assessee’s second PAN, citing a lack of proper opportunity for hearing.
ITAT directs the Assessing Officer to freshly adjudicate the tax case of Meenaz Anjum Dayatar to allow her to claim cost of acquisition and indexation against the sale of a crore property, which was incorrectly taxed as unexplained income under Section 68.
Bombay High Court sets aside a CESTAT order due to a two-year delay between the decision date and pronouncement date. The ruling relies on principles of natural justice and the Supreme Court precedent in Whirlpool Corporation to allow the writ petition.
The Kerala High Court restored an income tax appeal for ‘Sea Castle An Ayurvedic and Leisure Hotel,’ which had been dismissed by the Tribunal due to a 588-day delay. The court noted the initial Assessing Officer’s (AO) order lacked a hearing opportunity for the assessee, violating natural justice.
Personal hearing is mandatory in GST adjudication under Section 75(4) before any adverse decision. Courts confirm PH is a non-negotiable right of natural justice.
Dismissing the plea of unawareness of portal notices, the Delhi High Court upheld that assessees must regularly check the GST portal. Yet, to uphold natural justice, it remanded the matter for reconsideration since no reply or personal hearing was granted.
The Calcutta High Court, in the case of Khokan Motors Works (P.) Ltd Vs Senior Joint Commissioner of State Tax, set aside a tax demand of Rs. 40,37,877/- by the State Tax authorities.
ITAT Indore remands assessment orders for AYs 2013-14 to 2018-19 to the AO for de novo consideration, finding that non-compliance during proceedings occurred due to the COVID-19 pandemic and an inoperative email ID, violating natural justice.
Karnataka High Court rules in favor of JSW Steel, stating the denial of a cross-examination opportunity for third-party witnesses in a GST adjudication violates natural justice principles.
