Independent show-cause notices remain separate proceedings, while customs adjudication challenges should ordinarily follow the statutory appellate rem...
Institutional incapacity in customs settlement proceedings excludes non-functional quorum periods from statutory disposal timelines, preventing automa...
Interactive touchscreen panels with integrated computing functions fall under automatic data-processing machines rather than display monitors for cust...
Ex parte injunction service requirements were substantially met, while civil recovery and SFIO investigation into provident fund defalcation continued...
Enforcement of resolution-plan directions continues without a Supreme Court stay, preventing suspension of redistribution and escrowed-fund distributi...
Third-party ownership claims over attached property require Special Court adjudication where purchasers lack registered sale deeds and bona fides rema...
Pure-agent reimbursements in clearing and forwarding services are excluded from taxable value when qualifying third-party payments are properly record...
Customs relief for Strait of Hormuz maritime disruptions remains available, with existing conditions continuing unchanged through the extended validit...
Page of 4784
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
61 to 80 of 95673 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 4784
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
