Opportunity to respond to jurisdictional reports is mandatory before customs settlement duty enhancement; connected applications require consistent ad...
Specific customs headings for scaffolding components prevail over general classification, invalidating misclassification proceedings and enabling with...
Liquidator appointment under Section 34 requires consideration of creditor recommendations, valid professional authorisation, and preservation of vali...
Income-tax exemption for specified regulatory fees and government grants applies subject to non-commercial activity and continuing compliance conditio...
Digital accessibility audit and remediation deadlines extended, while all other disability-compliance obligations for regulated entities remain unchan...
Page of 4803
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
621 to 640 of 96047 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Attachment of Bank Account - Orders passed u/s 83(1) of the CGST Act - Period of limitation - The petitioner argued that as the orders had ceased to operate, there should be no impediment for them to operate the cash credit accounts. The respondents conceded to the statutory position but argued that a fresh attachment order had been passed, justifying the continued attachment. The petitioner contended that the repeated attachment was in breach of the CGST Act and they had not received copies of the latest attachment order. - The High Court noted that the order subject to these proceedings had ceased to operate, thus disposing of the petition while reserving the petitioner's right to challenge the fresh attachment order dated 13.12.2023.
Attachment of Bank Account - Orders passed u/s 83(1) of the CGST Act - Period of limitation - The petitioner argued that as the orders had ceased to operate, there should be no impediment for them to operate the cash credit accounts. The respondents conceded to the statutory position but argued that a fresh attachment order had been passed, justifying the continued attachment. The petitioner contended that the repeated attachment was in breach of the CGST Act and they had not received copies of the latest attachment order. - The High Court noted that the order subject to these proceedings had ceased to operate, thus disposing of the petition while reserving the petitioner's right to challenge the fresh attachment order dated 13.12.2023.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.