Transaction value rejection requires reliable corroboration; refundable VAT is excluded and temporary registration does not defeat new-vehicle exempti...
Appellate jurisdiction remains available where a wrist-worn gold ornament cannot conclusively be characterised as imported baggage at the preliminary ...
Written complaint requirement bars cognizance on police reports for securities offences, while unsupported breach of trust and cheating allegations fa...
Risk-based postal import clearance standardises electronic assessment, document requests, duty realisation and delivery controls at Foreign Post Offic...
Customs Cargo Service Provider appointment extends custodianship to additional terminal land, subject to cargo-control, security and licence condition...
Page of 4786
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
61 to 80 of 95714 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 filed appeals against orders under CGST/SGST Acts after a delay of four years. The court held that it cannot normally exercise jurisdiction under Article 226 to extend the time limit for filing appeals u/s 107 of the CGST/SGST Acts, as per the Supreme Court's rulings in Singh Enterprises and Ketan V. Parekh cases. Although Section 5 of the Limitation Act may not apply, the benefit of Section 14 can be extended in rare cases with extraordinary circumstances, which were not present in this case. Despite Article 226 not fixing a limitation period for writ petitions, inordinate delay in filing can lead to dismissal. The petitioner's contention of illness was viewed with suspicion. Consequently, the writ petition was dismissed due to the failure to approach the court within a reasonable time and the absence of extraordinary circumstances justifying condonation of delay.
The petitioner filed appeals against orders under CGST/SGST Acts after a delay of four years. The court held that it cannot normally exercise jurisdiction under Article 226 to extend the time limit for filing appeals u/s 107 of the CGST/SGST Acts, as per the Supreme Court's rulings in Singh Enterprises and Ketan V. Parekh cases. Although Section 5 of the Limitation Act may not apply, the benefit of Section 14 can be extended in rare cases with extraordinary circumstances, which were not present in this case. Despite Article 226 not fixing a limitation period for writ petitions, inordinate delay in filing can lead to dismissal. The petitioner's contention of illness was viewed with suspicion. Consequently, the writ petition was dismissed due to the failure to approach the court within a reasonable time and the absence of extraordinary circumstances justifying condonation of delay.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4786
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
