Rectification of mistake remains limited to self-evident record errors, preventing merits review through miscellaneous applications and preserving fin...
Tender creditworthiness conditions may extend to de facto Promoter Directors, with post-participation challenges generally barred absent arbitrariness...
Corporate representation in PMLA summons proceedings permitted through an authorised signatory, subject to directors' continuing cooperation and atten...
Helicopter charter classification requires effective control analysis, while territorial performance, reasoned credit orders and wilful suppression de...
Specified fund definition expands PAN exemption eligibility for registered alternative investment funds and qualifying International Financial Service...
Tax exemption for specified legal-services authority income applies retrospectively, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and...
Page of 4792
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
701 to 720 of 95833 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Writ interference with a GST show cause notice and adjudication order was declined because an efficacious statutory appeal was available and no breach of natural justice or statutory provision was shown. The petitioner had participated in the proceedings, filed replies, and had not raised before adjudication the plea that only part of the notice was served. The reference to 2021 in the relied-upon documents was accepted as an inadvertent typographical error, as the demand related to October 2018 to November 2019. The order in original covered the relevant periods and showed that the petitioner had sufficient opportunity of hearing; the disputed factual issues were left to the appellate authority.
Writ interference with a GST show cause notice and adjudication order was declined because an efficacious statutory appeal was available and no breach of natural justice or statutory provision was shown. The petitioner had participated in the proceedings, filed replies, and had not raised before adjudication the plea that only part of the notice was served. The reference to 2021 in the relied-upon documents was accepted as an inadvertent typographical error, as the demand related to October 2018 to November 2019. The order in original covered the relevant periods and showed that the petitioner had sufficient opportunity of hearing; the disputed factual issues were left to the appellate authority.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4792
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
