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...
Helicopter charter classification requires effective control analysis, while territorial performance, reasoned credit orders and wilful suppression de...
Specified fund definition expands PAN exemption eligibility for registered alternative investment funds and qualifying International Financial Service...
Tax exemption for specified legal-services authority income applies retrospectively, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and...
Page of 4792
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
701 to 720 of 95833 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.