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 dismissed the petition challenging the rejection of a rectification application concerning a mismatch in Form GSTR 3B due to a supplier's failure to file Form GSTR-01. The petitioner failed to respond to the show cause notice, leading to the issuance of the assessment order. The rectification application was rejected as no error apparent on the face of the record existed in the original order. The court held that factual disputes raised by the petitioner must be addressed during the assessment process, not through rectification proceedings. Consequently, the impugned order was affirmed, and no interference was warranted. The petition was dismissed.
The HC dismissed the petition challenging the rejection of a rectification application concerning a mismatch in Form GSTR 3B due to a supplier's failure to file Form GSTR-01. The petitioner failed to respond to the show cause notice, leading to the issuance of the assessment order. The rectification application was rejected as no error apparent on the face of the record existed in the original order. The court held that factual disputes raised by the petitioner must be addressed during the assessment process, not through rectification proceedings. Consequently, the impugned order was affirmed, and no interference was warranted. The petition was dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4800
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
