Charitable registration renewal cannot become an assessment of receipts, profitability or annual exemption compliance, requiring renewal and donation ...
AMP expenditure for own business is not an international transaction without an associated-enterprise arrangement, eliminating transfer pricing adjust...
Customs valuation must use comparable contemporary imports, while confiscation fines and penalties require proportionate recalculation on reassessed v...
Depositor-protection proceedings prevail over corporate insolvency, while liquidators may recover chit receivables using copies of seized company reco...
Intermediary service classification fails where overseas admission facilitation is supplied independently, preserving export treatment and small-provi...
Satellite transponder bandwidth is telecommunication, not Business Support Service; foreign non-telegraph providers triggered no service tax liability...
Page of 4824
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
441 to 460 of 96463 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Statutory appellate limitation under the BGST Act forms part of the legislative scheme for prompt GST dispute resolution. Writ jurisdiction may be available exceptionally for fundamental-rights violations, breach of natural justice, jurisdictional excess or a vires challenge, but not routinely to revive an expired appellate remedy. The prescribed extension period for a GST appeal constrains the appellate authority, and Article 226 cannot be used to disregard that substantive limitation or condone delay beyond it. An unexplained prolonged delay in approaching the High Court after an appeal is rejected as time-barred undermines the limitation regime; a writ challenge in those circumstances is not maintainable.
Statutory appellate limitation under the BGST Act forms part of the legislative scheme for prompt GST dispute resolution. Writ jurisdiction may be available exceptionally for fundamental-rights violations, breach of natural justice, jurisdictional excess or a vires challenge, but not routinely to revive an expired appellate remedy. The prescribed extension period for a GST appeal constrains the appellate authority, and Article 226 cannot be used to disregard that substantive limitation or condone delay beyond it. An unexplained prolonged delay in approaching the High Court after an appeal is rejected as time-barred undermines the limitation regime; a writ challenge in those circumstances is not maintainable.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.