Retrospective cancellation of charitable registration under section 12AB(4) was unsustainable; related-party benefit allegations did not prove nongenu...
Merger control notice and disclosure rules: Supreme Court limits penalties, rejects reopening of approved combination, and sets aside adverse findings...
The High Court declined to entertain the petition challenging the Order-in-Original issued by the Principal Commissioner of CGST and Central Excise, Pune. The Court held that no case was made out to deviate from the usual practice of requiring the party to exhaust the alternate statutory appeals available. Regarding the requirement of pre-deposit, the Court observed that the petitioner, being a multi-national company, cannot bypass the alternate remedy on such grounds. However, the Court granted liberty to the petitioner to challenge the notification dated March 31, 2023, if the occasion arises after exhausting the statutory remedies, keeping all contentions of parties open in this regard. The petition was disposed of.
The High Court declined to entertain the petition challenging the Order-in-Original issued by the Principal Commissioner of CGST and Central Excise, Pune. The Court held that no case was made out to deviate from the usual practice of requiring the party to exhaust the alternate statutory appeals available. Regarding the requirement of pre-deposit, the Court observed that the petitioner, being a multi-national company, cannot bypass the alternate remedy on such grounds. However, the Court granted liberty to the petitioner to challenge the notification dated March 31, 2023, if the occasion arises after exhausting the statutory remedies, keeping all contentions of parties open in this regard. The petition was disposed of.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4817 
Join Channel 
