Ratification of resignation acceptance validates separation retrospectively, while withdrawal may be refused through reasoned administrative discretio...
Nature-dependent electricity contracts receive new Ind AS accounting, hedge designation, transition and financial-statement disclosure requirements fr...
Alternative GST remedy permitted protective writ intervention for ex parte adjudication, preserving independent appellate review of input tax credit d...
Assessment against deceased sole proprietor requires proceedings against the legal representative, rendering prior assessment and appellate orders inv...
Residential waste collection classification under SAC 999423 defeats composite-supply exemption where facilitating goods are not transferred to the lo...
Condonation of delay permits statutory appeal restoration where inadequate service explanation prevented consideration of reassessment and taxable-inc...
Page of 4794
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
41 to 60 of 95875 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Appellate Tribunal set aside orders denying remission of excise duty on indigenous goods and customs duty on imported goods destroyed in factory fire. Tribunal found no dispute regarding fire incident and destruction of goods, appellant received insurance claim, no evidence of mischief or carelessness by appellant. Commissioner raised deficiencies in remission application without giving appellant opportunity to explain. Matter remanded to Commissioner for reconsideration of remission application after giving proper opportunity to appellant to address queries raised. Consequential demands of duty also set aside for fresh adjudication along with remission application by competent authority.
Appellate Tribunal set aside orders denying remission of excise duty on indigenous goods and customs duty on imported goods destroyed in factory fire. Tribunal found no dispute regarding fire incident and destruction of goods, appellant received insurance claim, no evidence of mischief or carelessness by appellant. Commissioner raised deficiencies in remission application without giving appellant opportunity to explain. Matter remanded to Commissioner for reconsideration of remission application after giving proper opportunity to appellant to address queries raised. Consequential demands of duty also set aside for fresh adjudication along with remission application by competent authority.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.