Online bond platforms may offer overseas-regulated products and tax-specific bonds subject to disclosures, compliance safeguards and revised complianc...
Corporate guarantee valuation permits actual ascertainable commission while barring retroactive application and extended-period penalties for bona fid...
Proper-officer jurisdiction under UPGST penalty provisions upheld; participation on merits prevents bypassing the statutory appellate remedy through w...
Transitioned CENVAT credit may validly satisfy mandatory pre-deposit requirements for legacy service tax appeals through Electronic Credit Ledger debi...
Building-plan sanction charges require statutory authority; unauthorised fees and GST were quashed, while labour cess must follow prescribed collectio...
Pure-agent exclusion fails where hotel booking facilitators receive third-party services themselves, making entire customer consideration taxable as r...
The HC held that the service of the order under section 73 of the WBGST/CGST Act, 2017 was proper, having been uploaded on the portal and communicated via email. Although the petitioner's explanation for preferring the appeal was not fully satisfactory, the court accepted the partial explanation and, considering the absence of a constituted appellate tribunal, directed the petitioner to deposit 10% of the disputed tax amount within three weeks, in addition to the amount already paid. Upon such deposit, the appellate authority was mandated to hear and decide the appeal on merits in accordance with law. Consequently, the HC set aside the appellate order dated 23 September 2024 and any consequential demand raised in Form GST APL-04, disposing of the petition accordingly.
The HC held that the service of the order under section 73 of the WBGST/CGST Act, 2017 was proper, having been uploaded on the portal and communicated via email. Although the petitioner's explanation for preferring the appeal was not fully satisfactory, the court accepted the partial explanation and, considering the absence of a constituted appellate tribunal, directed the petitioner to deposit 10% of the disputed tax amount within three weeks, in addition to the amount already paid. Upon such deposit, the appellate authority was mandated to hear and decide the appeal on merits in accordance with law. Consequently, the HC set aside the appellate order dated 23 September 2024 and any consequential demand raised in Form GST APL-04, disposing of the petition accordingly.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4798
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
