Dispute Resolution Panel objections must reach both prescribed forums; otherwise assessment may proceed and statutory appeal remains the proper remedy...
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...
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 
