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 HC quashed the impugned order where a demand notice was challenged for improper service. Following Anhad Impex precedent, the Court found that notices uploaded under "additional notices and orders" on the GST portal were not easily accessible and thus escaped the petitioner's attention. While Section 169 permits service via the common portal, the Court emphasized that the purpose of service is to make assessees aware of communications. The Court directed respondents to allow the petitioner to file a response within 30 days and for the notice to be properly adjudicated. The HC left open the question of whether email notifications should accompany portal uploads to ensure effective service.
The HC quashed the impugned order where a demand notice was challenged for improper service. Following Anhad Impex precedent, the Court found that notices uploaded under "additional notices and orders" on the GST portal were not easily accessible and thus escaped the petitioner's attention. While Section 169 permits service via the common portal, the Court emphasized that the purpose of service is to make assessees aware of communications. The Court directed respondents to allow the petitioner to file a response within 30 days and for the notice to be properly adjudicated. The HC left open the question of whether email notifications should accompany portal uploads to ensure effective service.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4792
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
