Coercive recovery during GST searches is restrained pending scrutiny, preserving normal business operations and requiring adherence to investigation g...
COVID-19 limitation exclusion and destination-specific e-way bills govern revisional timelines and penalties for undocumented third-party plywood deli...
Questions arising from miscellaneous application orders cannot challenge unaltered Tribunal findings, leaving the original order separately challengea...
Transfer-pricing comparability filters require fresh arm's-length analysis, while delayed receivables need separate reconsideration with working-capit...
Page of 4896
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
761 to 780 of 97907 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The High Court dismissed the petition challenging the rejection of appeal against cancellation of GST registration for non-compliance with GST REG 2017. The petitioner failed to furnish returns u/s 39 of the CGST Act, 2017. The show cause notice was issued on 15.01.2023, and the GST registration was cancelled vide order dated 15.01.2023. However, the petitioner filed an appeal on 28.03.2024, with a delay of 403 days, exceeding the statutory limitation period of three months u/s 107(1) of the CGST Act, 2017. The Court held that the petitioner was not entitled to relief due to the delay, lethargy in approach, and non-compliance with GST REG 2017 by not filing returns regularly. The Court found no perversity in the cancellation order or necessity for interference with the appellate order filed beyond the limitation period.
The High Court dismissed the petition challenging the rejection of appeal against cancellation of GST registration for non-compliance with GST REG 2017. The petitioner failed to furnish returns u/s 39 of the CGST Act, 2017. The show cause notice was issued on 15.01.2023, and the GST registration was cancelled vide order dated 15.01.2023. However, the petitioner filed an appeal on 28.03.2024, with a delay of 403 days, exceeding the statutory limitation period of three months u/s 107(1) of the CGST Act, 2017. The Court held that the petitioner was not entitled to relief due to the delay, lethargy in approach, and non-compliance with GST REG 2017 by not filing returns regularly. The Court found no perversity in the cancellation order or necessity for interference with the appellate order filed beyond the limitation period.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4896 
