The High Court held that the petitioner was not given adequate ...

Court Remands Case Due to Insufficient Response Time and Portal Issues, Orders New Submission Opportunity.

August 8, 2024

Case Laws Income Tax HC

The High Court held that the petitioner was not given adequate time to respond to a show cause notice, as only 6 clear working days were provided instead of the required 7 days. The petitioner's inability to submit a response due to the deactivation of the portal's submission button constituted a violation of natural justice. The Court noted that the purpose of a show cause notice is to allow for a response and highlighted that the petitioner faced difficulties due to a festival falling within the response period. As the assessment order was issued without considering the petitioner's response, the matter was remanded to the Faceless Assessment Unit. The petitioner was directed to submit a response within 15 days, with the Unit instructed to reactivate the submission button within a week and inform the petitioner via email.

View Source

← Previous Next →

The High Court held that the petitioner was not given adequate ...

Court Remands Case Due to Insufficient Response Time and Portal Issues, Orders New Submission Opportunity.

August 8, 2024

Case Laws Income Tax HC

You may also like:

The case pertains to the jurisdiction of impugned orders under the U.P.G.S.T. Act, 2017, and the time limitation u/s 73 and Section 44 of the Act. The key points are:...

This case deals with the applicability of Section 153, the limitation provision, to proceedings u/s 144C of the Income Tax Act. The key issues are whether the 11-month...

The Kerala High Court addressed a case involving the denial of Input Tax Credit (ITC) and a challenge to an assessment order on the grounds of being time-barred. The...

Limited jurisdiction of trial court after remand order; cannot enlarge scope beyond remand directions. Trial court erred in allowing evidence beyond remand's limited...

The Supreme Court considered a case involving condonation of delay in filing an appeal. The appellants filed the appeal after SEBI had already appealed to the Court...

The Rajasthan High Court examined the validity of revision proceedings u/s 263 concerning the period of limitation. The issue was whether the period of limitation for...

Limitation for passing a assessment order - Consequential order passed by the assessing authority beyond the time limit specified u/s 153 (2A) - The High Court examined...

The High Court dealt with a case involving the rejection of a refund claim due to discrepancies between the petitioner's GSTR 1 statement and GSTR 3B return. The Court...

Time limit u/s 73(10) of CGST Act for passing order u/s 73(9) - GST authorities re-designed portal to ensure 'View Notices' and 'View Additional Notices' tabs under one...

Automatic Vacation of the interim order / Stay Order after six months - judicial legislation or not - The Supreme Court held that interim orders cannot automatically...

The High Court examined whether proper show cause notices were issued before passing impugned orders u/s 73(9) of the State GST Act. It held that the summary of show...

The High Court examined the validity of an assessment order issued without considering the reply submitted by the assessee in response to a Show Cause Notice. It was...

The High Court reviewed an assessment order challenged for being unreasoned. The Court found that the order lacked proper reasoning as it confirmed the tax proposal...

The court dismissed the petitioner's appeal due to non-compliance with statutory requirements, specifically the failure to submit valid proof of payment of the mandatory...

The Delhi High Court set aside an order demanding payment including penalty u/s 73 of the CGST Act, 2017 due to the petitioner's lack of awareness and inability to...

Quick Updates: