Faceless reassessment jurisdiction turned on retrospective AO definition, with later faceless-assessment changes treated as clarificatory and procedur...
Page of 4807
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
2161 to 2180 of 96140 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 restored the petitioner's appeal due to a delay in filing. The appeal was filed before the second respondent, 14 days after the limitation expired. The court held that despite the marginal delay, the impugned order was set aside. The matter was remitted back to the Appellate Commissioner for disposal on merits and in accordance with the law, with the condition that the petitioner deposit an additional 20% of the disputed tax u/s 107 of the respective GST enactments. The impugned order was quashed, and the third respondent was directed to instruct the Tamil Nad Mercantile Bank Ltd. to unfreeze the petitioner's account after deducting 20% as pre-deposit. The petition was allowed.
The High Court restored the petitioner's appeal due to a delay in filing. The appeal was filed before the second respondent, 14 days after the limitation expired. The court held that despite the marginal delay, the impugned order was set aside. The matter was remitted back to the Appellate Commissioner for disposal on merits and in accordance with the law, with the condition that the petitioner deposit an additional 20% of the disputed tax u/s 107 of the respective GST enactments. The impugned order was quashed, and the third respondent was directed to instruct the Tamil Nad Mercantile Bank Ltd. to unfreeze the petitioner's account after deducting 20% as pre-deposit. The petition was allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4807 
Join Channel 
