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 rejected the writ petition challenging an intimation of tax issued under Section 73(5) of the KGST/CGST Act, 2017 as premature. The Court noted that the intimation merely ascertained tax with options for the petitioner to either pay with interest or file submissions. The document itself provided an opportunity for the petitioner to respond, and no show cause notice under Section 73(1) or final order under Section 73(9) had yet been issued. The Court concluded that judicial intervention was unwarranted at this preliminary stage of the tax assessment process.
The HC rejected the writ petition challenging an intimation of tax issued under Section 73(5) of the KGST/CGST Act, 2017 as premature. The Court noted that the intimation merely ascertained tax with options for the petitioner to either pay with interest or file submissions. The document itself provided an opportunity for the petitioner to respond, and no show cause notice under Section 73(1) or final order under Section 73(9) had yet been issued. The Court concluded that judicial intervention was unwarranted at this preliminary stage of the tax assessment process.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4792
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
