Statutory transfer formalities invalidated alleged share and property transfers, while retrospective record manipulation constituted oppression and mi...
Provisional attachment of laundered funds and equivalent-value property sustained, with statutory protection limited to pension, gratuity and providen...
Insolvency moratorium does not shield company officers from cheque dishonour prosecution for liability arising before corporate insolvency proceedings...
Advance-ruling mechanism governs pending GST classification, exemption and taxability disputes, limiting writ review once the specialised forum functi...
Page of 4788
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
581 to 600 of 95752 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 quashed an impugned order due to an excess tax demand compared to the amount in the show cause notice under Sub-Section (7) of Section 75 of Uttarakhand Goods and Services Act, 2017. The State acknowledged the order did not align with the Act as the demand exceeded the notice amount. The court allowed the petition, leading to the order's annulment on 06.11.2023.
The High Court quashed an impugned order due to an excess tax demand compared to the amount in the show cause notice under Sub-Section (7) of Section 75 of Uttarakhand Goods and Services Act, 2017. The State acknowledged the order did not align with the Act as the demand exceeded the notice amount. The court allowed the petition, leading to the order's annulment on 06.11.2023.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4788
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
