Ratification of resignation acceptance validates separation retrospectively, while withdrawal may be refused through reasoned administrative discretio...
Nature-dependent electricity contracts receive new Ind AS accounting, hedge designation, transition and financial-statement disclosure requirements fr...
Alternative GST remedy permitted protective writ intervention for ex parte adjudication, preserving independent appellate review of input tax credit d...
Assessment against deceased sole proprietor requires proceedings against the legal representative, rendering prior assessment and appellate orders inv...
Residential waste collection classification under SAC 999423 defeats composite-supply exemption where facilitating goods are not transferred to the lo...
Page of 4800
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
161 to 180 of 96000 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 set aside the cancellation of the petitioner's registration, finding that the impugned order lacked application of mind and did not assign reasons, thereby violating principles of natural justice. The cancellation was not in accordance with the prescribed grounds under Section 29 of the GST Act. The petitioner's revocation application was wrongly rejected for non-submission of a reply to the show cause notice, and the subsequent appeal was dismissed without reasons. The court held that the doctrine of merger does not apply where the cancellation order is unreasoned. The limitation ground cited in rejecting the appeal was also found untenable. Consequently, the petition was allowed, reinstating the petitioner's registration.
The HC set aside the cancellation of the petitioner's registration, finding that the impugned order lacked application of mind and did not assign reasons, thereby violating principles of natural justice. The cancellation was not in accordance with the prescribed grounds under Section 29 of the GST Act. The petitioner's revocation application was wrongly rejected for non-submission of a reply to the show cause notice, and the subsequent appeal was dismissed without reasons. The court held that the doctrine of merger does not apply where the cancellation order is unreasoned. The limitation ground cited in rejecting the appeal was also found untenable. Consequently, the petition was allowed, reinstating the petitioner's registration.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4800
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
