Specified income of Baddi Barotiwala Nalagarh Development Authority receives conditional tax exemption, retrospectively covering its designated assess...
Specified development authority income receives retrospective tax exemption, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and return-...
Unified Brand India framework introduces voluntary Trust Mark certification and funding support for export branding, packaging and global promotional ...
Origin Declaration authentication governs preferential tariff claims under India-UK CETA, requiring a validated reference number before import clearan...
Separate assessment orders for different years remain valid when distinct notices and hearing opportunities prevent prejudice from combined proceeding...
Defined public benefit can retain charitable character; registration renewal requires examining genuine activities and legal compliance, not surplus a...
Capital reduction is distinct from share buy-back, preventing buy-back tax; restructuring interest and related business deductions also survive scruti...
Page of 4792
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
981 to 1000 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" ?
Service of GST show cause notices and adjudication orders solely by uploading them on the Common Portal was treated as invalid where the 2017 Rules did not prescribe the portal as a mode of service. The retrospective amendment concerning portal functions did not alter that position. Where the assessee lacked knowledge of the uploaded order and serious civil consequences followed, portal upload alone could not constitute valid service. Applying Luxmi Traders, the appellate remedy was to be considered on merits upon satisfaction of the statutory pre-deposit condition; recovery remained subject to final adjudication and the bank-account attachment was revoked.
Service of GST show cause notices and adjudication orders solely by uploading them on the Common Portal was treated as invalid where the 2017 Rules did not prescribe the portal as a mode of service. The retrospective amendment concerning portal functions did not alter that position. Where the assessee lacked knowledge of the uploaded order and serious civil consequences followed, portal upload alone could not constitute valid service. Applying Luxmi Traders, the appellate remedy was to be considered on merits upon satisfaction of the statutory pre-deposit condition; recovery remained subject to final adjudication and the bank-account attachment was revoked.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.