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...
Customs relief for Strait of Hormuz maritime disruptions remains available, with existing conditions continuing unchanged through the extended validit...
GST demand limitation under Section 73 runs from the due date for the annual return; extensions of those due dates change its commencement, and pandemic-period exclusion must be applied when calculating the three-year period. A notice issued after the resulting deadline cannot be sustained under the ordinary limitation. Recourse to Section 74's five-year period requires the Assessing Officer's satisfaction, based on disclosed foundational facts, that fraud, wilful misstatement or suppression caused the tax shortfall or excess input tax credit. Audit objections and bare statutory assertions are insufficient. The show-cause notice and consequential order were set aside, with liberty for fresh Section 74 proceedings within the applicable extended limitation.
GST demand limitation under Section 73 runs from the due date for the annual return; extensions of those due dates change its commencement, and pandemic-period exclusion must be applied when calculating the three-year period. A notice issued after the resulting deadline cannot be sustained under the ordinary limitation. Recourse to Section 74's five-year period requires the Assessing Officer's satisfaction, based on disclosed foundational facts, that fraud, wilful misstatement or suppression caused the tax shortfall or excess input tax credit. Audit objections and bare statutory assertions are insufficient. The show-cause notice and consequential order were set aside, with liberty for fresh Section 74 proceedings within the applicable extended limitation.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.