Retention of seized property survives where recorded reasons support proceeds of crime, while stayed investigation periods are excluded from limitatio...
Specified income of Baddi Barotiwala Nalagarh Development Authority receives conditional tax exemption, retrospectively covering its designated assess...
Specified development authority income receives retrospective tax exemption, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and return-...
Unified Brand India framework introduces voluntary Trust Mark certification and funding support for export branding, packaging and global promotional ...
Origin Declaration authentication governs preferential tariff claims under India-UK CETA, requiring a validated reference number before import clearan...
Separate assessment orders for different years remain valid when distinct notices and hearing opportunities prevent prejudice from combined proceeding...
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 
of 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
