Authentication of paper assessment orders upheld, while qualifying repairs, consumables and vendor advance write-offs remain deductible business claim...
Transaction value cannot be rejected solely on non-statutory valuation guidelines without corroborative evidence supporting reassessment of final cust...
Cross-examination rights and corroborated evidence limit customs penalties for misdeclaration in genuine import transactions involving documented clea...
Tariff classification of vehicle gear components follows the specific gearing entry, displacing motor-vehicle parts classification and related liabili...
HC disposed of writ petition challenging GST registration cancellation under Section 29(2)(c) for non-furnishing returns for six months. Court found violation of natural justice principles as no personal hearing date was notified to petitioner. HC directed petitioner to approach concerned authority within two months seeking restoration by filing pending returns and paying tax dues with interest and late fees. Court held that if petitioner complies with proviso to Rule 22(4) of CGST Rules 2017, authority must consider restoration application expeditiously in accordance with law, given serious civil consequences of registration cancellation.
HC disposed of writ petition challenging GST registration cancellation under Section 29(2)(c) for non-furnishing returns for six months. Court found violation of natural justice principles as no personal hearing date was notified to petitioner. HC directed petitioner to approach concerned authority within two months seeking restoration by filing pending returns and paying tax dues with interest and late fees. Court held that if petitioner complies with proviso to Rule 22(4) of CGST Rules 2017, authority must consider restoration application expeditiously in accordance with law, given serious civil consequences of registration cancellation.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.