Necessary-party requirements limit impleadment of independent entities, while deferred consideration does not create an appealable adverse determinati...
Food supplement classification requires common parlance and authoritative tests, preventing treatment as proprietary Ayurvedic medicines without suppo...
Specified regulatory authority income receives conditional tax exemption, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income character, and return f...
Tax exemption for regulatory authority income applies retrospectively, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and return-filing...
Input tax credit conditions remain constitutionally valid, with eligible recipient claims considered under GST circulars and retrospective filing dead...
Page of 4809
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
861 to 880 of 96174 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
For GST first appeals, limitation runs from the actual communication of the adjudication order to the assessee. Where the assessee states that date, a presumption arises in its favour and the Revenue must rebut it with cogent material; failure to do so makes dismissal of the appeal as time-barred unsustainable. The Court also held that writ jurisdiction could be invoked despite an alternate statutory remedy because the appellate authority had ignored binding precedent and failed to record an independent finding on limitation. The impugned appellate orders were quashed and the matters remitted for fresh decision in accordance with the governing law on effective communication and limitation.
For GST first appeals, limitation runs from the actual communication of the adjudication order to the assessee. Where the assessee states that date, a presumption arises in its favour and the Revenue must rebut it with cogent material; failure to do so makes dismissal of the appeal as time-barred unsustainable. The Court also held that writ jurisdiction could be invoked despite an alternate statutory remedy because the appellate authority had ignored binding precedent and failed to record an independent finding on limitation. The impugned appellate orders were quashed and the matters remitted for fresh decision in accordance with the governing law on effective communication and limitation.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.