Jurisdictional facts in certificate-of-origin discrepancies can support customs show-cause proceedings, leaving factual explanations for departmental ...
Market value for captive electricity consumption follows industrial consumer tariffs, supporting profit computation for the power generation deduction...
The HC disposed of the writ petition challenging cancellation of petitioner's GST registration under Section 29(2)(c) of CGST Act, 2017 for non-filing of returns for six continuous months. The Court held that while the cancellation was legally valid, considering the serious civil consequences, the empowered officer retains authority to restore registration upon compliance with statutory requirements. The Court directed petitioner to approach the concerned authority within two months, furnishing all pending returns and making full payment of tax dues, interest, and late fees. The authority was mandated to consider the restoration application if petitioner complies with proviso to sub-rule (4) of Rule 22 of CGST Rules, 2017, and pass appropriate orders accordingly.
The HC disposed of the writ petition challenging cancellation of petitioner's GST registration under Section 29(2)(c) of CGST Act, 2017 for non-filing of returns for six continuous months. The Court held that while the cancellation was legally valid, considering the serious civil consequences, the empowered officer retains authority to restore registration upon compliance with statutory requirements. The Court directed petitioner to approach the concerned authority within two months, furnishing all pending returns and making full payment of tax dues, interest, and late fees. The authority was mandated to consider the restoration application if petitioner complies with proviso to sub-rule (4) of Rule 22 of CGST Rules, 2017, and pass appropriate orders accordingly.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.