Condonation of refiling delay refused where repeated defects, lack of diligence and vague explanations defeated the appeal against resolution plan app...
Page of 4828
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
4401 to 4420 of 96556 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
HC allowed the writ petition, quashing the impugned orders dated 27.7.2022, 3.1.2023, and 27.11.2024 passed under Section 130 of the GST Act. The court relied on its prior precedent in Dinesh Kumar Pradeep Kumar, which established that when excess stock is found, proceedings under Sections 73 and 74 of UPGST Act are applicable, and Section 130 proceedings cannot be initiated. The case was decided without exchanging pleadings, directly applying the existing judicial interpretation of the statutory provisions.
HC allowed the writ petition, quashing the impugned orders dated 27.7.2022, 3.1.2023, and 27.11.2024 passed under Section 130 of the GST Act. The court relied on its prior precedent in Dinesh Kumar Pradeep Kumar, which established that when excess stock is found, proceedings under Sections 73 and 74 of UPGST Act are applicable, and Section 130 proceedings cannot be initiated. The case was decided without exchanging pleadings, directly applying the existing judicial interpretation of the statutory provisions.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.