Reopening Assessments invalid where satisfaction and jurisdictional approval are absent for third party seized material, leading to quashing of assess...
Benami property exclusion from the insolvency estate: Benami Act proceedings preclude IBC tribunals from reopening attachments or treating such assets...
Exclusion of limitation period: pandemic suspension plus debtor acknowledgement can extend limitation, requiring fresh factfinding on guarantee invoca...
A show cause notice issued in disregard of a binding and unchallenged advance ruling was treated as non-est because the ruling had attained finality between the parties and remained operative under the CGST framework. The Court held that, where the invalidity of the notice was apparent on the face of the record, the petitioner was not required to first reply to the notice or pursue the statutory remedy. It therefore exercised writ jurisdiction under Article 226 and quashed the notice as lacking foundation.
A show cause notice issued in disregard of a binding and unchallenged advance ruling was treated as non-est because the ruling had attained finality between the parties and remained operative under the CGST framework. The Court held that, where the invalidity of the notice was apparent on the face of the record, the petitioner was not required to first reply to the notice or pursue the statutory remedy. It therefore exercised writ jurisdiction under Article 226 and quashed the notice as lacking foundation.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
