Faceless reassessment jurisdiction turned on retrospective AO definition, with later faceless-assessment changes treated as clarificatory and procedur...
Page of 4805
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
2121 to 2140 of 96100 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 held that the writ petition challenging an order passed under Section 74 of the OGST Act, 2017 was not maintainable due to being filed after the limitation period and without exhausting the alternative remedy of filing an appeal. The court emphasized the importance of adhering to statutory appeal procedures and cited the Supreme Court's decision in Assistant Commissioner (CT) LTU, Kakinada. The court also noted that even though the petitioner was not physically served the order, its availability on the common portal constituted valid service. Ultimately, the court dismissed the petition as not maintainable.
The Orissa High Court held that the writ petition challenging an order passed under Section 74 of the OGST Act, 2017 was not maintainable due to being filed after the limitation period and without exhausting the alternative remedy of filing an appeal. The court emphasized the importance of adhering to statutory appeal procedures and cited the Supreme Court's decision in Assistant Commissioner (CT) LTU, Kakinada. The court also noted that even though the petitioner was not physically served the order, its availability on the common portal constituted valid service. Ultimately, the court dismissed the petition as not maintainable.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.