Jurisdictional facts in certificate-of-origin discrepancies can support customs show-cause proceedings, leaving factual explanations for departmental ...
Market value for captive electricity consumption follows industrial consumer tariffs, supporting profit computation for the power generation deduction...
Writ jurisdiction was refused in GST adjudication because the controversy was amenable to the statutory appeal. The High Court held that proceedings under sections 73 and 74 of the CGST Act operate in distinct fields, so exoneration under section 73 did not bar action under section 74 on the material before the authorities. It also held that appraisal and reappraisal of evidence, including consideration of additional evidence, lay within the appellate process. The need to make a statutory pre-deposit was not a sufficient ground to bypass the appeal, and the petitioner was left to pursue that remedy on merits.
Writ jurisdiction was refused in GST adjudication because the controversy was amenable to the statutory appeal. The High Court held that proceedings under sections 73 and 74 of the CGST Act operate in distinct fields, so exoneration under section 73 did not bar action under section 74 on the material before the authorities. It also held that appraisal and reappraisal of evidence, including consideration of additional evidence, lay within the appellate process. The need to make a statutory pre-deposit was not a sufficient ground to bypass the appeal, and the petitioner was left to pursue that remedy on merits.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
