Charitable trust income application permits verified capital expenditure but rejects deferred pre-operative claims and requires reconsideration of con...
Reinsurance premium deductions require established regulatory breaches, while independently acquired software qualifies within the computer depreciati...
Rectification of mistake remains limited to self-evident record errors, preventing merits review through miscellaneous applications and preserving fin...
Tender creditworthiness conditions may extend to de facto Promoter Directors, with post-participation challenges generally barred absent arbitrariness...
Corporate representation in PMLA summons proceedings permitted through an authorised signatory, subject to directors' continuing cooperation and atten...
Petitioner challenged order u/s 73 of Odisha Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. HC held Section 61(2) requires consideration of explanation furnished. Section 61(3) states if no satisfactory explanation is given, proper officer may initiate action u/s 73. Initiation of proceeding u/s 73 was without jurisdiction. Impugned order quashed. Petitioner's reply dated 29.07.2021 to be dealt with u/s 61, thereafter revenue can proceed.
Petitioner challenged order u/s 73 of Odisha Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. HC held Section 61(2) requires consideration of explanation furnished. Section 61(3) states if no satisfactory explanation is given, proper officer may initiate action u/s 73. Initiation of proceeding u/s 73 was without jurisdiction. Impugned order quashed. Petitioner's reply dated 29.07.2021 to be dealt with u/s 61, thereafter revenue can proceed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.