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...
Pure-agent reimbursements in clearing and forwarding services are excluded from taxable value when qualifying third-party payments are properly record...
Customs relief for Strait of Hormuz maritime disruptions remains available, with existing conditions continuing unchanged through the extended validit...
Cancellation of GST registration without providing opportunity to be heard violated principles of natural justice. Appeal filed by petitioner rejected due to expiry of limitation period u/s 107 of CGST Act, 2017. Show cause notice issued to petitioner for failure to furnish returns for six consecutive months. Petitioner claimed no reply filed within stipulated period, denying principles of natural justice. However, petitioner failed to furnish returns for six months and filed appeal after delay of one year and twenty days, beyond three-month limitation period u/s 107(1). Petitioner's lethargic approach in not filing returns and delayed appeal filing led to dismissal of writ petition, as no perversity found in cancellation order or appellate order beyond statutory limitation period.
Cancellation of GST registration without providing opportunity to be heard violated principles of natural justice. Appeal filed by petitioner rejected due to expiry of limitation period u/s 107 of CGST Act, 2017. Show cause notice issued to petitioner for failure to furnish returns for six consecutive months. Petitioner claimed no reply filed within stipulated period, denying principles of natural justice. However, petitioner failed to furnish returns for six months and filed appeal after delay of one year and twenty days, beyond three-month limitation period u/s 107(1). Petitioner's lethargic approach in not filing returns and delayed appeal filing led to dismissal of writ petition, as no perversity found in cancellation order or appellate order beyond statutory limitation period.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.