Commodity derivatives position limits adopt revised breach penalties, broad commodity criteria, and client open-position limits based on deliverable s...
Effective hearing in GST adjudication requires actual opportunity to respond; ineffective service through a former auditor invalidated ex parte procee...
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.