Retrospective cancellation of charitable registration under section 12AB(4) was unsustainable; related-party benefit allegations did not prove nongenu...
Merger control notice and disclosure rules: Supreme Court limits penalties, rejects reopening of approved combination, and sets aside adverse findings...
The appeal was initially rejected on the ground of limitation due to the non-availability of a self-attested copy of the order within the stipulated time frame as per Rule 108 of the UPGST/CGST Rules. However, the High Court, relying on the precedent set in the case of Visible Alpha Solutions India Private Limited, held that an appeal cannot be dismissed solely on the ground of limitation for non-filing of a certified copy of the order. Consequently, the impugned order was quashed, and the matter was remanded to the concerned authority for a fresh decision within two months, after hearing all stakeholders and passing a reasoned and speaking order.
The appeal was initially rejected on the ground of limitation due to the non-availability of a self-attested copy of the order within the stipulated time frame as per Rule 108 of the UPGST/CGST Rules. However, the High Court, relying on the precedent set in the case of Visible Alpha Solutions India Private Limited, held that an appeal cannot be dismissed solely on the ground of limitation for non-filing of a certified copy of the order. Consequently, the impugned order was quashed, and the matter was remanded to the concerned authority for a fresh decision within two months, after hearing all stakeholders and passing a reasoned and speaking order.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4823 
Join Channel 
