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" ?
Wrongful availment and passing on of input tax credit, wrongful availment of IGST refund under Advance Authorisation scheme. Constitutional validity of Notification No. 09/2023-Central Tax dated 31.03.2023 questioned, whether ultra-vires the CGST Act provisions. Held that the challenged order is dated 21.02.2024, and the challenge is on merits. Appeal lies before the Appellate Authority u/s 107 of the CGST Act to examine questions of fact and law. The petition regarding the impugned orders is not entertained. Regarding initiation of proceedings u/s 74 instead of Section 73 of the CGST Act, the Appellate Authority can examine the questions of law while examining the facts. The challenge to the notification dated 31.03.2023 does not arise as no notice was issued u/s 73 of the CGST Act. The present petition is misconceived and dismissed.
Wrongful availment and passing on of input tax credit, wrongful availment of IGST refund under Advance Authorisation scheme. Constitutional validity of Notification No. 09/2023-Central Tax dated 31.03.2023 questioned, whether ultra-vires the CGST Act provisions. Held that the challenged order is dated 21.02.2024, and the challenge is on merits. Appeal lies before the Appellate Authority u/s 107 of the CGST Act to examine questions of fact and law. The petition regarding the impugned orders is not entertained. Regarding initiation of proceedings u/s 74 instead of Section 73 of the CGST Act, the Appellate Authority can examine the questions of law while examining the facts. The challenge to the notification dated 31.03.2023 does not arise as no notice was issued u/s 73 of the CGST Act. The present petition is misconceived and dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4803
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
