Charitable trust income application permits verified capital expenditure but rejects deferred pre-operative claims and requires reconsideration of con...
Reinsurance premium deductions require established regulatory breaches, while independently acquired software qualifies within the computer depreciati...
Rectification of mistake remains limited to self-evident record errors, preventing merits review through miscellaneous applications and preserving fin...
Tender creditworthiness conditions may extend to de facto Promoter Directors, with post-participation challenges generally barred absent arbitrariness...
Corporate representation in PMLA summons proceedings permitted through an authorised signatory, subject to directors' continuing cooperation and atten...
The HC upheld the cancellation of the petitioner's GST registration under Section 29(2)(c) of the CGST Act, 2017, due to non-filing of returns for six consecutive months. However, acknowledging the serious civil consequences of such cancellation, the court directed that the petitioner may apply for restoration of registration by submitting all pending returns and paying outstanding tax dues, interest, and late fees in accordance with the proviso to sub-rule (4) of Rule 22 of the CGST Rules, 2017. The empowered officer retains jurisdiction to consider the restoration application and pass appropriate orders within the statutory framework. The petitioner was granted two months to approach the concerned authority for restoration. The writ petition was disposed of on these terms.
The HC upheld the cancellation of the petitioner's GST registration under Section 29(2)(c) of the CGST Act, 2017, due to non-filing of returns for six consecutive months. However, acknowledging the serious civil consequences of such cancellation, the court directed that the petitioner may apply for restoration of registration by submitting all pending returns and paying outstanding tax dues, interest, and late fees in accordance with the proviso to sub-rule (4) of Rule 22 of the CGST Rules, 2017. The empowered officer retains jurisdiction to consider the restoration application and pass appropriate orders within the statutory framework. The petitioner was granted two months to approach the concerned authority for restoration. The writ petition was disposed of on these terms.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.