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...
Page of 4796
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
301 to 320 of 95918 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
HC dismissed the writ petition challenging tax SCN and final order under WBGST/CGST Act, 2017. The court held that the petitioners have an alternative statutory remedy through appeal under Section 74/73, and cannot bypass such efficacious remedy by invoking extraordinary writ jurisdiction under Article 226. Despite relying on a Madras HC precedent, the petition was rejected due to availability of alternative remedy and lack of exceptional circumstances warranting judicial intervention. The court emphasized that all contested issues can be adequately addressed through the prescribed appellate mechanism, rendering the writ petition non-maintainable.
HC dismissed the writ petition challenging tax SCN and final order under WBGST/CGST Act, 2017. The court held that the petitioners have an alternative statutory remedy through appeal under Section 74/73, and cannot bypass such efficacious remedy by invoking extraordinary writ jurisdiction under Article 226. Despite relying on a Madras HC precedent, the petition was rejected due to availability of alternative remedy and lack of exceptional circumstances warranting judicial intervention. The court emphasized that all contested issues can be adequately addressed through the prescribed appellate mechanism, rendering the writ petition non-maintainable.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4796
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
