Online bond platforms may offer overseas-regulated products and tax-specific bonds subject to disclosures, compliance safeguards and revised complianc...
Corporate guarantee valuation permits actual ascertainable commission while barring retroactive application and extended-period penalties for bona fid...
Proper-officer jurisdiction under UPGST penalty provisions upheld; participation on merits prevents bypassing the statutory appellate remedy through w...
Transitioned CENVAT credit may validly satisfy mandatory pre-deposit requirements for legacy service tax appeals through Electronic Credit Ledger debi...
Building-plan sanction charges require statutory authority; unauthorised fees and GST were quashed, while labour cess must follow prescribed collectio...
Pure-agent exclusion fails where hotel booking facilitators receive third-party services themselves, making entire customer consideration taxable as r...
The HC dismissed a writ petition challenging the interpretation of Rule 3 of the Goods and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal (Appointment and Conditions of Services of President and Members) Rules, 2023. The petitioner contested the reconstituted Search-cum-Selection Committee's decision to restart the appointment process de novo after some members demitted office. The HC held that Rule 3 does not expressly restrict the reconstituted Committee's procedures, and the phrase "as it may deem fit" must be construed pragmatically to achieve the statutory objective. The Court found no illegality in the Committee's decision to scrutinize applications afresh based on Intelligence Bureau inputs, emphasizing that appointments to judicial positions require high integrity and suitability standards.
The HC dismissed a writ petition challenging the interpretation of Rule 3 of the Goods and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal (Appointment and Conditions of Services of President and Members) Rules, 2023. The petitioner contested the reconstituted Search-cum-Selection Committee's decision to restart the appointment process de novo after some members demitted office. The HC held that Rule 3 does not expressly restrict the reconstituted Committee's procedures, and the phrase "as it may deem fit" must be construed pragmatically to achieve the statutory objective. The Court found no illegality in the Committee's decision to scrutinize applications afresh based on Intelligence Bureau inputs, emphasizing that appointments to judicial positions require high integrity and suitability standards.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
