Arrest safeguards and transit remand requirements invalidated detention following inter-State transfer without communicated grounds or magistrate auth...
Arrest safeguards require disclosed grounds, relative intimation and transit remand, while duplicate prosecution under the CGST framework is unsustain...
Document Identification Number defects can invalidate GST assessments, with delayed challenges entertained conditionally where patent irregularities e...
Windmill commissioning evidence supported higher depreciation where grid connection and electricity generation proved operational use before the relev...
Pharmaceutical promotion and transfer-pricing comparability principles limited disallowances, while uncorroborated search allegations and unsupported ...
Business expenditure substantiation supports scrap credits, statutory payments and expense claims, while depreciation requires proof of actual busines...
Page of 4786
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
461 to 480 of 95715 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The petitioner, a contractor enrolled under the GST Act, 2017, had his GSTN registration canceled due to non-filing of returns for six months. Despite claiming to have handed over documents to an accountant, the petitioner failed to file an appeal within the statutory 90-day period due to being unaware of the proceedings. The court held that the Bombay High Court had previously ruled that the limitation period should not be an issue in registration cancellation cases as it does not adversely affect the state's rights. The GST Act aims to promote trade, and denying registration affects the petitioner's livelihood under Article 21. Small entrepreneurs may struggle with technology, so the GST department should amend provisions, convey notices via SMS and regional languages, and relax rules to avoid stifling small businesses. The writ petitions were disposed of.
The petitioner, a contractor enrolled under the GST Act, 2017, had his GSTN registration canceled due to non-filing of returns for six months. Despite claiming to have handed over documents to an accountant, the petitioner failed to file an appeal within the statutory 90-day period due to being unaware of the proceedings. The court held that the Bombay High Court had previously ruled that the limitation period should not be an issue in registration cancellation cases as it does not adversely affect the state's rights. The GST Act aims to promote trade, and denying registration affects the petitioner's livelihood under Article 21. Small entrepreneurs may struggle with technology, so the GST department should amend provisions, convey notices via SMS and regional languages, and relax rules to avoid stifling small businesses. The writ petitions were disposed of.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4786
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
