Rectification of mistake remains limited to self-evident record errors, preventing merits review through miscellaneous applications and preserving fin...
Tender creditworthiness conditions may extend to de facto Promoter Directors, with post-participation challenges generally barred absent arbitrariness...
Corporate representation in PMLA summons proceedings permitted through an authorised signatory, subject to directors' continuing cooperation and atten...
Helicopter charter classification requires effective control analysis, while territorial performance, reasoned credit orders and wilful suppression de...
Specified fund definition expands PAN exemption eligibility for registered alternative investment funds and qualifying International Financial Service...
Tax exemption for specified legal-services authority income applies retrospectively, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and...
Page of 4792
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
701 to 720 of 95833 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The court dismissed the appeal for non-prosecution in accordance with Rule 20 of the CESTAT Procedure Rules, 1982. The request for adjournment beyond the statutory maximum of three times was rejected. The counsel's justification of a fire incident in 2021 was deemed inadequate, as there was ample time to reconstruct the file or obtain relevant documents from the registry or the appellant. The court held that if the counsel was serious about the matter, they should have taken appropriate measures, and thus, the request for further adjournment could not be considered.
The court dismissed the appeal for non-prosecution in accordance with Rule 20 of the CESTAT Procedure Rules, 1982. The request for adjournment beyond the statutory maximum of three times was rejected. The counsel's justification of a fire incident in 2021 was deemed inadequate, as there was ample time to reconstruct the file or obtain relevant documents from the registry or the appellant. The court held that if the counsel was serious about the matter, they should have taken appropriate measures, and thus, the request for further adjournment could not be considered.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4792
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
