Charitable trust income application permits verified capital expenditure but rejects deferred pre-operative claims and requires reconsideration of con...
Reinsurance premium deductions require established regulatory breaches, while independently acquired software qualifies within the computer depreciati...
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...
Page of 4801
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
861 to 880 of 96001 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Alternative statutory remedy does not make a writ petition non-maintainable, but its entertainment remains discretionary. The statutory bar on parallel CGST proceedings applies only where State GST proceedings on the same subject matter were initiated earlier. Where the CGST show-cause notice preceded SGST notices, no jurisdictional defect arose under the bar. An earlier order concerning seized goods was distinct from later adjudication following investigation, notice under Section 74 and consideration of the taxpayer's reply, and therefore did not constitute parallel adjudication. In the absence of a jurisdictional infirmity, the petitioners were directed to pursue the statutory appeal, with writ-prosecution time excluded for limitation.
Alternative statutory remedy does not make a writ petition non-maintainable, but its entertainment remains discretionary. The statutory bar on parallel CGST proceedings applies only where State GST proceedings on the same subject matter were initiated earlier. Where the CGST show-cause notice preceded SGST notices, no jurisdictional defect arose under the bar. An earlier order concerning seized goods was distinct from later adjudication following investigation, notice under Section 74 and consideration of the taxpayer's reply, and therefore did not constitute parallel adjudication. In the absence of a jurisdictional infirmity, the petitioners were directed to pursue the statutory appeal, with writ-prosecution time excluded for limitation.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4801
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
