Defined public benefit can retain charitable character; registration renewal requires examining genuine activities and legal compliance, not surplus a...
Capital reduction is distinct from share buy-back, preventing buy-back tax; restructuring interest and related business deductions also survive scruti...
Transfer pricing and tax deductions upheld on established principles, while employee contributions and warranty provisions returned for fresh examinat...
Captive transfer pricing relies on industrial consumer tariffs, while genuine quotations can benchmark effluent treatment transfers under the Other Me...
Specific tariff classification for ophthalmic instruments and extended limitation principles determine the treatment of duty demands, confiscation, an...
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 
