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...
Page of 4881
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
101 to 120 of 97618 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.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4881 
