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...
Page of 4796
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
301 to 320 of 95918 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Constitutional Validity of Sections 2, 9, 12 and 18 of the Constitution (101st Amendment) Act, 2016 violating the basic structure of the Constitution of India - grounds raised are based on the constitution of a Goods and Services Tax Council (GST Council) - In its judgment, the High Court scrutinizes the petitioner's locus standi, emphasizing the necessity of demonstrating aggrievement in PILs. Despite the petitioner's assertion of public interest, the court finds that they lack standing, as they have not suffered any legal injury or prejudice resulting from the impugned provisions. Additionally, the court highlights the petitioner's absence of registration under GST enactments or involvement in commercial activities, further undermining their standing. - Ultimately, the High Court dismisses the writ petition, concluding that there is no basis to entertain it.
Constitutional Validity of Sections 2, 9, 12 and 18 of the Constitution (101st Amendment) Act, 2016 violating the basic structure of the Constitution of India - grounds raised are based on the constitution of a Goods and Services Tax Council (GST Council) - In its judgment, the High Court scrutinizes the petitioner's locus standi, emphasizing the necessity of demonstrating aggrievement in PILs. Despite the petitioner's assertion of public interest, the court finds that they lack standing, as they have not suffered any legal injury or prejudice resulting from the impugned provisions. Additionally, the court highlights the petitioner's absence of registration under GST enactments or involvement in commercial activities, further undermining their standing. - Ultimately, the High Court dismisses the writ petition, concluding that there is no basis to entertain it.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4796
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
