Independent show-cause notices remain separate proceedings, while customs adjudication challenges should ordinarily follow the statutory appellate rem...
Institutional incapacity in customs settlement proceedings excludes non-functional quorum periods from statutory disposal timelines, preventing automa...
Interactive touchscreen panels with integrated computing functions fall under automatic data-processing machines rather than display monitors for cust...
Ex parte injunction service requirements were substantially met, while civil recovery and SFIO investigation into provident fund defalcation continued...
Enforcement of resolution-plan directions continues without a Supreme Court stay, preventing suspension of redistribution and escrowed-fund distributi...
Third-party ownership claims over attached property require Special Court adjudication where purchasers lack registered sale deeds and bona fides rema...
Pure-agent reimbursements in clearing and forwarding services are excluded from taxable value when qualifying third-party payments are properly record...
HC examined interpretation of limitation periods under Section 107 of CGST Act 2017. The period of "three months" for filing appeal and "one month" for condonation of delay should be interpreted literally, not converted to 90 days and 30 days respectively. Following precedent from a recent arbitration case, HC determined that three-month period should be calculated calendar month-wise, not by counting days. In the instant case, appeal filed on 26.04.2024 fell within the extended one-month period from original deadline of 27.03.2024. Appellate authority erred by converting months to days. HC ruled that legislative intent clearly specified periods in months, not days. Appeal was held maintainable within condonation period subject to showing sufficient cause.
HC examined interpretation of limitation periods under Section 107 of CGST Act 2017. The period of "three months" for filing appeal and "one month" for condonation of delay should be interpreted literally, not converted to 90 days and 30 days respectively. Following precedent from a recent arbitration case, HC determined that three-month period should be calculated calendar month-wise, not by counting days. In the instant case, appeal filed on 26.04.2024 fell within the extended one-month period from original deadline of 27.03.2024. Appellate authority erred by converting months to days. HC ruled that legislative intent clearly specified periods in months, not days. Appeal was held maintainable within condonation period subject to showing sufficient cause.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4782
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
