Opportunity to respond to jurisdictional reports is mandatory before customs settlement duty enhancement; connected applications require consistent ad...
Specific customs headings for scaffolding components prevail over general classification, invalidating misclassification proceedings and enabling with...
Liquidator appointment under Section 34 requires consideration of creditor recommendations, valid professional authorisation, and preservation of vali...
Income-tax exemption for specified regulatory fees and government grants applies subject to non-commercial activity and continuing compliance conditio...
Digital accessibility audit and remediation deadlines extended, while all other disability-compliance obligations for regulated entities remain unchan...
Page of 4803
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
621 to 640 of 96047 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The High Court considered the maintainability of an appeal u/s the GST Act. The appeal was dismissed due to a 152-day delay in filing. The court clarified that the appellate authority can condone delays beyond 120 days. The original order was dated 08.02.2022, and the appeal was filed on 21.07.2022, resulting in a 53-day delay after deducting the statutory 90-day period. The court found the appellate authority's determination of a 152-day delay as erroneous. The court held that the delay should have been condoned and remanded the matter to the appellate authority for fresh consideration. The petition was disposed of by way of remand.
The High Court considered the maintainability of an appeal u/s the GST Act. The appeal was dismissed due to a 152-day delay in filing. The court clarified that the appellate authority can condone delays beyond 120 days. The original order was dated 08.02.2022, and the appeal was filed on 21.07.2022, resulting in a 53-day delay after deducting the statutory 90-day period. The court found the appellate authority's determination of a 152-day delay as erroneous. The court held that the delay should have been condoned and remanded the matter to the appellate authority for fresh consideration. The petition was disposed of by way of remand.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4803
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
