Limitation in customs appeals permits exclusion for bona fide refund proceedings, enabling restoration of Bill of Entry assessment challenges on merit...
Warehousing permission requires deposit at the designated bonded warehouse; unauthorised diversion triggers confiscation, redemption fine and importer...
The HC declined to exercise extraordinary jurisdiction to quash or modify the show cause notice issued under Section 74 of the CGST Act, 2017, finding no basis to interfere at this stage. The Court held that allegations of suppression of facts could not be dismissed prematurely and must be examined by the issuing authority. The petitioner was permitted to file a reply to the show cause notice within two weeks, which the authority is directed to consider. The petition was disposed of accordingly, with no relief granted against the issuance or content of the notice, thereby preserving the procedural rights of the parties under the CGST Act.
The HC declined to exercise extraordinary jurisdiction to quash or modify the show cause notice issued under Section 74 of the CGST Act, 2017, finding no basis to interfere at this stage. The Court held that allegations of suppression of facts could not be dismissed prematurely and must be examined by the issuing authority. The petitioner was permitted to file a reply to the show cause notice within two weeks, which the authority is directed to consider. The petition was disposed of accordingly, with no relief granted against the issuance or content of the notice, thereby preserving the procedural rights of the parties under the CGST Act.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4792
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
