Admissibility of electronic evidence bars undervaluation demands where printouts, retracted statements and no cross-examination leave the case unprove...
Limitation in oppression and mismanagement proceedings: prior knowledge of removal and dilution barred the challenge, with valuation directions upheld...
Omission of Rule 96(10) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017 without a saving or sunset clause ended its refund restriction for pending proceedings concerning integrated tax paid on exports. Proceedings under an omitted rule can continue only where a saving provision or statutory legal fiction preserves them. The GST Council's advisory recommendation for prospective omission did not bind the rule-making authority. The Supreme Court treated the omission as applicable to all pending refund proceedings, dismissed challenges to that application, and dismissed challenges to the rule's validity as infructuous.
Omission of Rule 96(10) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017 without a saving or sunset clause ended its refund restriction for pending proceedings concerning integrated tax paid on exports. Proceedings under an omitted rule can continue only where a saving provision or statutory legal fiction preserves them. The GST Council's advisory recommendation for prospective omission did not bind the rule-making authority. The Supreme Court treated the omission as applicable to all pending refund proceedings, dismissed challenges to that application, and dismissed challenges to the rule's validity as infructuous.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.