HC allowed the petition, finding a violation of natural justice ...

Judicial Review Exposes Procedural Gaps in Tax Penalty Application, Mandates Comprehensive Reasoning Under Section 74 CGST Act

April 11, 2025

Case Laws GST HC

HC allowed the petition, finding a violation of natural justice due to lack of proper application of mind by the respondent authority under Section 74 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The court directed the Commissioner to review orders lacking substantive reasoning for invoking fraud provisions, specifically mandating explicit documentation of willful misstatement or material fact suppression. The judicial intervention emphasized procedural integrity by requiring comprehensive rationale when applying statutory penalties, effectively remanding the matter for comprehensive reconsideration and appropriate administrative action.

View Source

← Previous Next →

HC allowed the petition, finding a violation of natural justice ...

Judicial Review Exposes Procedural Gaps in Tax Penalty Application, Mandates Comprehensive Reasoning Under Section 74 CGST Act

April 11, 2025

Case Laws GST HC

You may also like:

Review petition - Levy of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - Tribunal sustaining the levy without providing an opportunity of hearing - Review applicant had paid entire tax amount...

Scope of Judicial Review – Review of the decision of the Settlement Commission - There is limited scope of judicial review - Despite such narrow confines of judicial...

Review of Order after gap of 13 years - delay can be condoned or not - There is a period of one year provided as per the Act, 2003 for seeking review of any order passed...

Section 90 of the Income Tax Act allows relief from double taxation by granting foreign tax credits (FTCs) on foreign income taxed in both India and the other country....

SC upheld constitutional validity of arrest powers under Customs Act and GST Acts while establishing key procedural safeguards. Person arrested has right to meet...

The High Court held that while exercising jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution, it does not assume the role of an appellate authority to conduct a merit...

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - the words are clean and simple and in order to expose the assessee to the penalty, unless the case is strictly covered by the Proviso, the...

Provisional attachment of Bank Accounts - lack of application of mind - In the event, the Commissioner refuses to lift the orders of provisional attachment once again,...

The AT dismissed the review applications filed for waiver of pre-deposit of penalties under FERA. The appellants' failure to comply with the deposit order justified the...

This case pertains to the precedence and priority of consideration between an application filed u/s 54(C) and Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC)...

The High Court held that the impugned Press Release by the Ministry of Finance, purporting to direct judicial and quasi-judicial authorities to classify all...

Review of order - Levy of penalty - grounds for review are that the imposition of penalty by the authorities is not automatic and the same can be imposed only when there...

Offence u/s 276(C)(2) and 277 - Allegation of willful tax evasion and non-payment of admitted tax - compounding application. The petitioner submitted income tax return...

The case before the Allahabad High Court involved the jurisdiction of the Collector (Stamp) to recall or review an order under Section 47-A of the Indian Stamp Act,...

Action for recovery of penalty, pending Appeals/Reviews

Quick Updates: