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...
Customs relief for Strait of Hormuz maritime disruptions remains available, with existing conditions continuing unchanged through the extended validit...
Page of 4792
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
221 to 240 of 95833 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The AAAR dismissed the appeal due to late filing beyond the statutorily prescribed time limits under Section 100(2) of CGST Act, 2017. The Authority clarified that while it has discretionary power to condone delays, this power is strictly limited to an additional 30 days beyond the initial 30-day filing period. The appellant failed to demonstrate sufficient cause for the delay, with their first communication occurring on 17.10.2024, well after both the original deadline (30.08.2024) and the condonable period (29.09.2024) had expired. The AAAR emphasized that ignorance of filing procedures cannot excuse non-compliance, and the discretionary power to condone delays is not obligatory but contingent upon showing sufficient cause within statutory timeframes.
The AAAR dismissed the appeal due to late filing beyond the statutorily prescribed time limits under Section 100(2) of CGST Act, 2017. The Authority clarified that while it has discretionary power to condone delays, this power is strictly limited to an additional 30 days beyond the initial 30-day filing period. The appellant failed to demonstrate sufficient cause for the delay, with their first communication occurring on 17.10.2024, well after both the original deadline (30.08.2024) and the condonable period (29.09.2024) had expired. The AAAR emphasized that ignorance of filing procedures cannot excuse non-compliance, and the discretionary power to condone delays is not obligatory but contingent upon showing sufficient cause within statutory timeframes.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4792
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
