Charitable trust income application permits verified capital expenditure but rejects deferred pre-operative claims and requires reconsideration of con...
Reinsurance premium deductions require established regulatory breaches, while independently acquired software qualifies within the computer depreciati...
Rectification of mistake remains limited to self-evident record errors, preventing merits review through miscellaneous applications and preserving fin...
Tender creditworthiness conditions may extend to de facto Promoter Directors, with post-participation challenges generally barred absent arbitrariness...
Corporate representation in PMLA summons proceedings permitted through an authorised signatory, subject to directors' continuing cooperation and atten...
Page of 4801
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
861 to 880 of 96001 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The case involved a challenge to the time limitation for filing an appeal under Section 107 of the UPGST Act. The High Court held that limitation provisions in tax laws serve to ensure timely compliance, discourage delays, and promote equal treatment of taxpayers. The petitioner received the order on July 12, 2022, and filed the appeal on November 10, 2022. The court found errors in the calculation of the time limit by the authorities, warranting the exercise of writ jurisdiction. The court directed the appellate authority to allow the delay in filing the appeal and proceed to hear the appeal on merits promptly, preferably within two months. The application was disposed of accordingly.
The case involved a challenge to the time limitation for filing an appeal under Section 107 of the UPGST Act. The High Court held that limitation provisions in tax laws serve to ensure timely compliance, discourage delays, and promote equal treatment of taxpayers. The petitioner received the order on July 12, 2022, and filed the appeal on November 10, 2022. The court found errors in the calculation of the time limit by the authorities, warranting the exercise of writ jurisdiction. The court directed the appellate authority to allow the delay in filing the appeal and proceed to hear the appeal on merits promptly, preferably within two months. The application was disposed of accordingly.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.