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...
Page of 4798
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
341 to 360 of 95957 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 held that an officer appointed under Section 6 of the Karnataka GST Act qualifies as a proper officer under Section 4 of the IGST Act through cross-empowerment provisions. The court determined that challenges to confiscation orders passed under Section 130 must proceed through statutory appeal mechanisms under Section 107 of KGST rather than writ petitions, following precedents from SC decisions in Falcon Enterprises and Commercial Steel Ltd. The petition was deemed not entertainable due to the existence of alternative statutory remedy. The court disposed of the petition while granting the petitioner 4 weeks to file an appeal under Section 107 KGST read with Section 20 IGST.
The HC held that an officer appointed under Section 6 of the Karnataka GST Act qualifies as a proper officer under Section 4 of the IGST Act through cross-empowerment provisions. The court determined that challenges to confiscation orders passed under Section 130 must proceed through statutory appeal mechanisms under Section 107 of KGST rather than writ petitions, following precedents from SC decisions in Falcon Enterprises and Commercial Steel Ltd. The petition was deemed not entertainable due to the existence of alternative statutory remedy. The court disposed of the petition while granting the petitioner 4 weeks to file an appeal under Section 107 KGST read with Section 20 IGST.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4798
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
