Online bond platforms may offer overseas-regulated products and tax-specific bonds subject to disclosures, compliance safeguards and revised complianc...
Corporate guarantee valuation permits actual ascertainable commission while barring retroactive application and extended-period penalties for bona fid...
Proper-officer jurisdiction under UPGST penalty provisions upheld; participation on merits prevents bypassing the statutory appellate remedy through w...
Transitioned CENVAT credit may validly satisfy mandatory pre-deposit requirements for legacy service tax appeals through Electronic Credit Ledger debi...
Building-plan sanction charges require statutory authority; unauthorised fees and GST were quashed, while labour cess must follow prescribed collectio...
Pure-agent exclusion fails where hotel booking facilitators receive third-party services themselves, making entire customer consideration taxable as r...
A review order restoring pending appeals was treated as a consequence of the liberty expressly reserved in the earlier appellate order and of the Supreme Court's recall of the binding precedent. The HC held that, where the Tribunal allowed review and restored the appeals in terms of that liberty, the appellants could not challenge the restoration by disputing review power or limitation. It further held that an order granting review and reviving the main appeal is interlocutory and not independently appealable, because the CPC applies to the Tribunal and the bar in Order 47 Rule 7 CPC operates against an appeal from such a review order. The appeals were dismissed as not maintainable.
A review order restoring pending appeals was treated as a consequence of the liberty expressly reserved in the earlier appellate order and of the Supreme Court's recall of the binding precedent. The HC held that, where the Tribunal allowed review and restored the appeals in terms of that liberty, the appellants could not challenge the restoration by disputing review power or limitation. It further held that an order granting review and reviving the main appeal is interlocutory and not independently appealable, because the CPC applies to the Tribunal and the bar in Order 47 Rule 7 CPC operates against an appeal from such a review order. The appeals were dismissed as not maintainable.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.