Transfer-pricing aggregation of distinct support-service and subcontract transactions was rejected, while debt-free receivables attracted no notional ...
Customs exemptions cover photovoltaic assembly machinery and PVF backsheets, while fully declared cleared imports may avoid confiscation and penalties...
Specific tariff classification for LCD devices overrides treatment as electricity-meter parts, defeating differential duty, extended limitation, and p...
Stayed disciplinary punishment does not establish unfitness for insolvency professional registration; reconsideration must disregard mere pendency of ...
Indirect corporate control can create related-party status, excluding financial creditors from Committee of Creditors representation, participation an...
Scientific research association approval requires continuing SIRO status, annual donation reporting, and donor certificates for the approved foundatio...
Page of 4888
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
241 to 260 of 97755 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Defective service of a GST show-cause notice and adjudication order through an incorrect common-portal tab justified condonation of delay in filing the GST appeal. Uploading a notice on the portal alone was treated as insufficient service where there was no acknowledgement or reply, and belated recovery action supported the taxpayer's claim that the order appeared under "Additional Notices and Orders" rather than the designated tab. Although the Appellate Authority was bound by the statutory limitation period, refusal to hear the appeal would cause grave prejudice where the delay arose from circumstances beyond the taxpayer's control. The appeal was directed to be entertained and decided on merits if filed within the stipulated period.
Defective service of a GST show-cause notice and adjudication order through an incorrect common-portal tab justified condonation of delay in filing the GST appeal. Uploading a notice on the portal alone was treated as insufficient service where there was no acknowledgement or reply, and belated recovery action supported the taxpayer's claim that the order appeared under "Additional Notices and Orders" rather than the designated tab. Although the Appellate Authority was bound by the statutory limitation period, refusal to hear the appeal would cause grave prejudice where the delay arose from circumstances beyond the taxpayer's control. The appeal was directed to be entertained and decided on merits if filed within the stipulated period.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.