Transfer-pricing aggregation of distinct support-service and subcontract transactions was rejected, while debt-free receivables attracted no notional ...
Customs exemptions cover photovoltaic assembly machinery and PVF backsheets, while fully declared cleared imports may avoid confiscation and penalties...
Specific tariff classification for LCD devices overrides treatment as electricity-meter parts, defeating differential duty, extended limitation, and p...
Stayed disciplinary punishment does not establish unfitness for insolvency professional registration; reconsideration must disregard mere pendency of ...
Indirect corporate control can create related-party status, excluding financial creditors from Committee of Creditors representation, participation an...
Page of 4881
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
101 to 120 of 97618 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 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 
TaxTMI 
of 4881 
