Political contribution deductions require recipient party compliance with contribution-reporting conditions; banking-channel donations alone do not qu...
Aggregation under TNMM prevents selective testing of intra-group services without comparable uncontrolled transactions, while appellate additional cla...
Protective assessment cannot duplicate identical receipts under competing characterisations; remote services did not establish a taxable permanent est...
Current account treatment of overseas tournament services removed most FEMA findings, but excess EEFC remittance and delayed repatriation remained bre...
Modification of bail conditions remains available through inherent jurisdiction where onerous deposits undermine justice and cannot recover disputed d...
Merchant banker regulation consolidates registration, governance, capital, reporting, outsourcing and investor-protection requirements under an update...
Page of 4798
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
601 to 620 of 95957 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The Orissa High Court considered a case involving inordinate delay in adjudicating a show cause notice issued in 2008 related to a dispute from 2004-05. The court held that the delay of over 9 years in notifying the petitioner about the proceedings and issuing personal hearing notices after 10 years from the show cause notice date violated Section 11A of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The court emphasized that such delays are fatal to the validity of the notice and cause prejudice. Referring to a previous case, the court dismissed the writ petition and directed the petitioner to appeal before the appellate tribunal. Consequently, the court quashed the show cause notice and the Order-in-Original issued after the prolonged delay, allowing the writ petition.
The Orissa High Court considered a case involving inordinate delay in adjudicating a show cause notice issued in 2008 related to a dispute from 2004-05. The court held that the delay of over 9 years in notifying the petitioner about the proceedings and issuing personal hearing notices after 10 years from the show cause notice date violated Section 11A of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The court emphasized that such delays are fatal to the validity of the notice and cause prejudice. Referring to a previous case, the court dismissed the writ petition and directed the petitioner to appeal before the appellate tribunal. Consequently, the court quashed the show cause notice and the Order-in-Original issued after the prolonged delay, allowing the writ petition.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4798
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
