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...
Condonation of delay permits statutory appeal restoration where inadequate service explanation prevented consideration of reassessment and taxable-inc...
Page of 4798
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
121 to 140 of 95955 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 declined to exercise writ jurisdiction in a case involving allegations of fraudulent availment of ITC amounting to approximately Rs. 63.83 crores by 23 fake firms. Citing precedent, the Court held that writ petitions challenging such allegations are ordinarily not maintainable due to the significant impact on the GST regime and the exchequer. Although the petitioner raised procedural grievances regarding notice and consideration of submissions, the Court noted appearances by some parties and found no infirmity warranting interference. The petitioner was granted an opportunity to file an appeal under Section 107 of the CGST Act, 2017, by 31 August 2025, with the requisite pre-deposit, which shall be admitted and heard on merits without dismissal on limitation grounds. The petition was accordingly disposed of.
The HC declined to exercise writ jurisdiction in a case involving allegations of fraudulent availment of ITC amounting to approximately Rs. 63.83 crores by 23 fake firms. Citing precedent, the Court held that writ petitions challenging such allegations are ordinarily not maintainable due to the significant impact on the GST regime and the exchequer. Although the petitioner raised procedural grievances regarding notice and consideration of submissions, the Court noted appearances by some parties and found no infirmity warranting interference. The petitioner was granted an opportunity to file an appeal under Section 107 of the CGST Act, 2017, by 31 August 2025, with the requisite pre-deposit, which shall be admitted and heard on merits without dismissal on limitation grounds. The petition was accordingly disposed of.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.