Section 74 demands fail where fraud findings are absent, and unnotified section 73 penalties cannot be substituted.
Case-Laws
GST
Finding that fraud, wilful misstatement, collusion or suppression was absent makes a demand sustained under section 74 internally inconsistent where that finding remains unchallenged. A demand cannot be defended on the hypothetical basis that proceedings under section 73 would have been within limitation when the show cause notice invoked section 74. Penalty under section 73(9) cannot be imposed where the notice proposed penalty only under section 74, because it exceeds the charges put to the taxpayer; a lower penalty amount does not cure the lack of notice. These jurisdictional defects require the demand and penalty to be set aside without considering remaining grounds.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =