Admissibility of electronic evidence bars undervaluation demands where printouts, retracted statements and no cross-examination leave the case unprove...
Limitation in oppression and mismanagement proceedings: prior knowledge of removal and dilution barred the challenge, with valuation directions upheld...
A writ challenge to a show-cause notice was treated as premature because the notice only proposed action and the petitioner could still file objections in the statutory process; the Court therefore declined to entertain the petition, allowed a further reply to the corrigendum, and directed disposal by a reasoned and speaking order. On jurisdiction, the Court held that the CGST Assistant/Deputy Commissioner was vested with authority under the relevant rules, and a differing rubber-stamp description below the signature did not negate that competence. The jurisdictional objection was rejected.
A writ challenge to a show-cause notice was treated as premature because the notice only proposed action and the petitioner could still file objections in the statutory process; the Court therefore declined to entertain the petition, allowed a further reply to the corrigendum, and directed disposal by a reasoned and speaking order. On jurisdiction, the Court held that the CGST Assistant/Deputy Commissioner was vested with authority under the relevant rules, and a differing rubber-stamp description below the signature did not negate that competence. The jurisdictional objection was rejected.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
