Transfer-pricing aggregation of distinct support-service and subcontract transactions was rejected, while debt-free receivables attracted no notional ...
Customs exemptions cover photovoltaic assembly machinery and PVF backsheets, while fully declared cleared imports may avoid confiscation and penalties...
Specific tariff classification for LCD devices overrides treatment as electricity-meter parts, defeating differential duty, extended limitation, and p...
Stayed disciplinary punishment does not establish unfitness for insolvency professional registration; reconsideration must disregard mere pendency of ...
The HC examined whether proceedings under Section 73 of the U.P. GST Act, 2017 were time-barred. The proceedings commenced on 20.09.2023 via show cause notice with a final order issued on 15.12.2023. Applying the precedent established in M/s A.V. Pharma vs. State of U.P. & Ors., the Court determined that such orders could only be passed until 31.12.2023, even with time extensions. Since the proceedings were completed within this timeframe (15.12.2023), they were not time-barred. However, the Court ultimately quashed the impugned orders and proceedings, allowing the petition on other undisclosed grounds.
The HC examined whether proceedings under Section 73 of the U.P. GST Act, 2017 were time-barred. The proceedings commenced on 20.09.2023 via show cause notice with a final order issued on 15.12.2023. Applying the precedent established in M/s A.V. Pharma vs. State of U.P. & Ors., the Court determined that such orders could only be passed until 31.12.2023, even with time extensions. Since the proceedings were completed within this timeframe (15.12.2023), they were not time-barred. However, the Court ultimately quashed the impugned orders and proceedings, allowing the petition on other undisclosed grounds.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4891 
