Invoice-based recovery claims remain time-barred despite separate winding-up proceedings, absent valid acknowledgment or part-payment of the disputed ...
Extended limitation fails without specific suppression allegations, while overseas employee secondment remains taxable as manpower supply within norma...
Time-share accommodation classification excludes Club or Association Service where purchasers receive contractual occupancy rights without genuine mem...
CENVAT credit for trading requires reversal, while taxable-service rental credit remains proportionately available and limitation issues await resolut...
Page of 4792
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
61 to 80 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 
