Independent show-cause notices remain separate proceedings, while customs adjudication challenges should ordinarily follow the statutory appellate rem...
Institutional incapacity in customs settlement proceedings excludes non-functional quorum periods from statutory disposal timelines, preventing automa...
Interactive touchscreen panels with integrated computing functions fall under automatic data-processing machines rather than display monitors for cust...
Ex parte injunction service requirements were substantially met, while civil recovery and SFIO investigation into provident fund defalcation continued...
Enforcement of resolution-plan directions continues without a Supreme Court stay, preventing suspension of redistribution and escrowed-fund distributi...
Third-party ownership claims over attached property require Special Court adjudication where purchasers lack registered sale deeds and bona fides rema...
Page of 4796
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
301 to 320 of 95918 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Time limitation for passing an order u/s 92CA is a contentious issue. The Tribunal followed the Madras High Court's decision in Pfizer Healthcare, but the Revenue has filed an SLP challenging it before the Supreme Court. Interpretation of Section 92CA's interplay with Section 153 regarding limitation is pending consideration by the Supreme Court. The Bombay High Court's order in PayPal Payments is also challenged before the Supreme Court. To avoid multiplicity of proceedings, the appeals are adjourned sine die, awaiting the Supreme Court's rulings on these issues. Proceeding otherwise would necessitate cross-appeals, adding to the multiplicity.
Time limitation for passing an order u/s 92CA is a contentious issue. The Tribunal followed the Madras High Court's decision in Pfizer Healthcare, but the Revenue has filed an SLP challenging it before the Supreme Court. Interpretation of Section 92CA's interplay with Section 153 regarding limitation is pending consideration by the Supreme Court. The Bombay High Court's order in PayPal Payments is also challenged before the Supreme Court. To avoid multiplicity of proceedings, the appeals are adjourned sine die, awaiting the Supreme Court's rulings on these issues. Proceeding otherwise would necessitate cross-appeals, adding to the multiplicity.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4796
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
