GST payment representations require record-based, reasoned decisions while substantive entitlement remains open for determination by competent authori...
Reassessment sanction under extended limitation required approval from the competent specified authority, invalidating proceedings approved by an inco...
Internal CUP benchmarking for fixed-rate Masala Bonds prevails over floating external comparables, eliminating the related transfer-pricing adjustment...
Jurisdictional validity of revision notices: incorrect official capacity and mere change of opinion invalidate revision of property income assessments...
Availability of a statutory appellate remedy against GST registration cancellation and rejection of revocation ordinarily precludes adjudication of factual disputes in writ jurisdiction. Appeals lay against both orders; therefore, factual contentions remained open for determination by the appellate authority. Where the revocation-rejection order was undated but served on 22 August 2026, the service date was directed to be treated as the order date for pursuing the appellate remedy. The taxpayer was permitted to file appeals against both orders within two weeks, for expeditious disposal.
Availability of a statutory appellate remedy against GST registration cancellation and rejection of revocation ordinarily precludes adjudication of factual disputes in writ jurisdiction. Appeals lay against both orders; therefore, factual contentions remained open for determination by the appellate authority. Where the revocation-rejection order was undated but served on 22 August 2026, the service date was directed to be treated as the order date for pursuing the appellate remedy. The taxpayer was permitted to file appeals against both orders within two weeks, for expeditious disposal.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4888 
