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" ?
Retrospective cancellation of GST registration was treated as permissible because section 29(2) expressly allows cancellation from any date, and the second proviso was read within the same scheme to permit suspension during pending cancellation proceedings. The challenge to retrospective suspension was therefore rejected, and no basis was found to question section 29(2) or rule 21(a). The notice was also considered procedurally fair because it allowed a reply and personal hearing, so the writ challenge to the show-cause notice was declined and the objections were left to be raised before the authority.
Retrospective cancellation of GST registration was treated as permissible because section 29(2) expressly allows cancellation from any date, and the second proviso was read within the same scheme to permit suspension during pending cancellation proceedings. The challenge to retrospective suspension was therefore rejected, and no basis was found to question section 29(2) or rule 21(a). The notice was also considered procedurally fair because it allowed a reply and personal hearing, so the writ challenge to the show-cause notice was declined and the objections were left to be raised before the authority.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.