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 dismissed the petition seeking a declaration that the blocking of Input Tax Credit (ITC) was unlawful due to lack of jurisdiction and violation of principles of natural justice. The court held that u/r 86A(1) of the OGST Rules, 2017, the Deputy Commissioner of State Taxes, being higher in rank than an Assistant Commissioner, had jurisdiction to pass the impugned orders relating to State GST. The court clarified that the circular issued by the Government of India on 02.11.2021 is applicable only to Central GST and not State GST unless adopted by the State Government through a declaration, which was not done in this case. Consequently, the claim of lack of jurisdiction and violation of natural justice was rejected, and the petition was disposed of.
The High Court dismissed the petition seeking a declaration that the blocking of Input Tax Credit (ITC) was unlawful due to lack of jurisdiction and violation of principles of natural justice. The court held that u/r 86A(1) of the OGST Rules, 2017, the Deputy Commissioner of State Taxes, being higher in rank than an Assistant Commissioner, had jurisdiction to pass the impugned orders relating to State GST. The court clarified that the circular issued by the Government of India on 02.11.2021 is applicable only to Central GST and not State GST unless adopted by the State Government through a declaration, which was not done in this case. Consequently, the claim of lack of jurisdiction and violation of natural justice was rejected, and the petition was disposed of.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4803
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
