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 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 4800
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
