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...
Section 88(3) of the GST enactments makes directors of a private company in liquidation jointly and severally liable for unrecovered tax dues incurred during their tenure, unless they establish before the Commissioner that non-recovery was not caused by their gross neglect, misfeasance or breach of duty. The notes state that a director's later retirement from an associated partnership does not by itself prevent recovery from that firm's accounts where the person was a partner during the default period. They also address recovery from related entities: interchanged family management and formation of a subsequent company to avoid arrears may justify examination of whether the corporate veil should be lifted.
Section 88(3) of the GST enactments makes directors of a private company in liquidation jointly and severally liable for unrecovered tax dues incurred during their tenure, unless they establish before the Commissioner that non-recovery was not caused by their gross neglect, misfeasance or breach of duty. The notes state that a director's later retirement from an associated partnership does not by itself prevent recovery from that firm's accounts where the person was a partner during the default period. They also address recovery from related entities: interchanged family management and formation of a subsequent company to avoid arrears may justify examination of whether the corporate veil should be lifted.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.