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...
Pure-agent reimbursements in clearing and forwarding services are excluded from taxable value when qualifying third-party payments are properly record...
Customs relief for Strait of Hormuz maritime disruptions remains available, with existing conditions continuing unchanged through the extended validit...
The Chhattisgarh High Court considered the maintainability of a petition challenging an order issued u/s 73(1) of the GST Act. The court noted that the order was appealable u/s 107 of the GST Act. Referring to the principle of exhaustion of alternative remedy, the court cited the Supreme Court's stance that when statutory remedies are available, writ petitions should not be entertained. The court emphasized that the petitioner had the option to challenge the order through an appeal, and dismissed the writ petition, stating that the petitioner's ability to access their email could be addressed in the appellate process. The court concluded that there were no grounds to entertain the writ petition, hence it was dismissed.
The Chhattisgarh High Court considered the maintainability of a petition challenging an order issued u/s 73(1) of the GST Act. The court noted that the order was appealable u/s 107 of the GST Act. Referring to the principle of exhaustion of alternative remedy, the court cited the Supreme Court's stance that when statutory remedies are available, writ petitions should not be entertained. The court emphasized that the petitioner had the option to challenge the order through an appeal, and dismissed the writ petition, stating that the petitioner's ability to access their email could be addressed in the appellate process. The court concluded that there were no grounds to entertain the writ petition, hence it was dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
