Independent show-cause notices remain separate proceedings, while customs adjudication challenges should ordinarily follow the statutory appellate rem...
Institutional incapacity in customs settlement proceedings excludes non-functional quorum periods from statutory disposal timelines, preventing automa...
Interactive touchscreen panels with integrated computing functions fall under automatic data-processing machines rather than display monitors for cust...
Ex parte injunction service requirements were substantially met, while civil recovery and SFIO investigation into provident fund defalcation continued...
Enforcement of resolution-plan directions continues without a Supreme Court stay, preventing suspension of redistribution and escrowed-fund distributi...
Third-party ownership claims over attached property require Special Court adjudication where purchasers lack registered sale deeds and bona fides rema...
Pure-agent reimbursements in clearing and forwarding services are excluded from taxable value when qualifying third-party payments are properly record...
Rectification petition - Validity Of Order passed - discrepancy between the GSTR 3B return - The petitioner contended that the discrepancy arose due to the belated filing of GSTR 1 by the supplier for one invoice and asserted their inability to upload a reply on the GST portal. Supporting documents, including certificates from the supplier and their Chartered Accountant, were submitted but not considered in the impugned order. - The High Court found that the non-consideration of these documents was significant and warranted interference with the order. Consequently, the court set aside the order and remanded the matter to the respondent for reconsideration.
Rectification petition - Validity Of Order passed - discrepancy between the GSTR 3B return - The petitioner contended that the discrepancy arose due to the belated filing of GSTR 1 by the supplier for one invoice and asserted their inability to upload a reply on the GST portal. Supporting documents, including certificates from the supplier and their Chartered Accountant, were submitted but not considered in the impugned order. - The High Court found that the non-consideration of these documents was significant and warranted interference with the order. Consequently, the court set aside the order and remanded the matter to the respondent for reconsideration.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4794
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
