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 set aside the order dated 08.11.2023 regarding attachment of petitioner's bank property under CGST/KGST Act, 2017, remitting the matter back to the first respondent for fresh consideration. Despite petitioner's failure to respond to pre-intimation notice and show cause notice, the Court adopted a justice-oriented approach, accepting petitioner's claim that non-compliance stemmed from bona fide reasons and unavoidable circumstances. The petitioner was granted one more opportunity to submit a reply to the show cause notice, with the Court imposing costs of Rs.10,000/- payable to the High Court Advocate Welfare Fund. The petition was allowed by way of remand.
The HC set aside the order dated 08.11.2023 regarding attachment of petitioner's bank property under CGST/KGST Act, 2017, remitting the matter back to the first respondent for fresh consideration. Despite petitioner's failure to respond to pre-intimation notice and show cause notice, the Court adopted a justice-oriented approach, accepting petitioner's claim that non-compliance stemmed from bona fide reasons and unavoidable circumstances. The petitioner was granted one more opportunity to submit a reply to the show cause notice, with the Court imposing costs of Rs.10,000/- payable to the High Court Advocate Welfare Fund. The petition was allowed by way of remand.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4792
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
