COVID-19 limitation exclusion and destination-specific e-way bills govern revisional timelines and penalties for undocumented third-party plywood deli...
Questions arising from miscellaneous application orders cannot challenge unaltered Tribunal findings, leaving the original order separately challengea...
Transfer-pricing comparability filters require fresh arm's-length analysis, while delayed receivables need separate reconsideration with working-capit...
Section 73(4B)(b) requires service-tax adjudication, where possible, within one year when the extended period is invoked. The qualification permits only a reasonable and legally justifiable departure, not an unrestricted power to keep a show-cause notice pending for an inordinate period. Where the notice material enabled adjudication and no adequate explanation existed, representations or claimed adjournments could not justify prolonged delay. Unexplained delay rendered the adjudication arbitrary, contrary to Section 73(4B)(b) and Article 14, leading to quashing of the service-tax order. Availability of a statutory appeal did not bar writ jurisdiction because the challenge raised a legal question and involved arbitrary adjudication.
Section 73(4B)(b) requires service-tax adjudication, where possible, within one year when the extended period is invoked. The qualification permits only a reasonable and legally justifiable departure, not an unrestricted power to keep a show-cause notice pending for an inordinate period. Where the notice material enabled adjudication and no adequate explanation existed, representations or claimed adjournments could not justify prolonged delay. Unexplained delay rendered the adjudication arbitrary, contrary to Section 73(4B)(b) and Article 14, leading to quashing of the service-tax order. Availability of a statutory appeal did not bar writ jurisdiction because the challenge raised a legal question and involved arbitrary adjudication.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4897 
