Transfer-pricing aggregation of distinct support-service and subcontract transactions was rejected, while debt-free receivables attracted no notional ...
Customs exemptions cover photovoltaic assembly machinery and PVF backsheets, while fully declared cleared imports may avoid confiscation and penalties...
Specific tariff classification for LCD devices overrides treatment as electricity-meter parts, defeating differential duty, extended limitation, and p...
Stayed disciplinary punishment does not establish unfitness for insolvency professional registration; reconsideration must disregard mere pendency of ...
Indirect corporate control can create related-party status, excluding financial creditors from Committee of Creditors representation, participation an...
Page of 4881
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
101 to 120 of 97618 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
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 
TaxTMI 
of 4881 
