Online bond platforms may offer overseas-regulated products and tax-specific bonds subject to disclosures, compliance safeguards and revised complianc...
Corporate guarantee valuation permits actual ascertainable commission while barring retroactive application and extended-period penalties for bona fid...
Proper-officer jurisdiction under UPGST penalty provisions upheld; participation on merits prevents bypassing the statutory appellate remedy through w...
Transitioned CENVAT credit may validly satisfy mandatory pre-deposit requirements for legacy service tax appeals through Electronic Credit Ledger debi...
Building-plan sanction charges require statutory authority; unauthorised fees and GST were quashed, while labour cess must follow prescribed collectio...
Pure-agent exclusion fails where hotel booking facilitators receive third-party services themselves, making entire customer consideration taxable as r...
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.