Dispute Resolution Panel objections must reach both prescribed forums; otherwise assessment may proceed and statutory appeal remains the proper remedy...
Political contribution deductions require recipient party compliance with contribution-reporting conditions; banking-channel donations alone do not qu...
Aggregation under TNMM prevents selective testing of intra-group services without comparable uncontrolled transactions, while appellate additional cla...
Protective assessment cannot duplicate identical receipts under competing characterisations; remote services did not establish a taxable permanent est...
Current account treatment of overseas tournament services removed most FEMA findings, but excess EEFC remittance and delayed repatriation remained bre...
Modification of bail conditions remains available through inherent jurisdiction where onerous deposits undermine justice and cannot recover disputed d...
The petitioner failed to challenge the matter within statutory provisions and raised the constitutional validity of Section 29(2) under CGST and BGST Acts. The court found the decision in Rohit Enterprises persuasive but not binding. While the facts differed, the hardship was similar to a previous case where the constitutional guarantee to carry out trade and commerce was upheld. No valid ground was raised against the delay in filing an appeal, as Section 30 allows revocation of cancellation within 30 days. The court found no reason to exercise discretionary power or entertain the writ petition testing Section 29(2)'s constitutional validity, as the orders were within statutory boundaries. Consequently, the writ petition was dismissed.
The petitioner failed to challenge the matter within statutory provisions and raised the constitutional validity of Section 29(2) under CGST and BGST Acts. The court found the decision in Rohit Enterprises persuasive but not binding. While the facts differed, the hardship was similar to a previous case where the constitutional guarantee to carry out trade and commerce was upheld. No valid ground was raised against the delay in filing an appeal, as Section 30 allows revocation of cancellation within 30 days. The court found no reason to exercise discretionary power or entertain the writ petition testing Section 29(2)'s constitutional validity, as the orders were within statutory boundaries. Consequently, the writ petition was dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
