Transfer-pricing aggregation of distinct support-service and subcontract transactions was rejected, while debt-free receivables attracted no notional ...
Customs exemptions cover photovoltaic assembly machinery and PVF backsheets, while fully declared cleared imports may avoid confiscation and penalties...
Specific tariff classification for LCD devices overrides treatment as electricity-meter parts, defeating differential duty, extended limitation, and p...
Stayed disciplinary punishment does not establish unfitness for insolvency professional registration; reconsideration must disregard mere pendency of ...
Indirect corporate control can create related-party status, excluding financial creditors from Committee of Creditors representation, participation an...
Page of 4881
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
101 to 120 of 97618 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 rejected the respondents' contention regarding time-barred appeal and held the cancellation of GST registration invalid due to non-application of mind and violation of natural justice principles. The court found that the quasi-judicial authority failed to consider the petitioner's reply to the show cause notice, rendering the cancellation order non-speaking and legally infirm. Consequently, the impugned orders dated 11.08.2022, 12.09.2022, 22.08.2024, and 03.09.2024 were set aside. The matter was remanded to the Superintendent, Danapur, for fresh adjudication, directing a thorough consideration of the petitioner's contentions and completion of proceedings within three months from receipt of the order. The petition was allowed by way of remand, ensuring adherence to procedural fairness and statutory requirements.
The HC rejected the respondents' contention regarding time-barred appeal and held the cancellation of GST registration invalid due to non-application of mind and violation of natural justice principles. The court found that the quasi-judicial authority failed to consider the petitioner's reply to the show cause notice, rendering the cancellation order non-speaking and legally infirm. Consequently, the impugned orders dated 11.08.2022, 12.09.2022, 22.08.2024, and 03.09.2024 were set aside. The matter was remanded to the Superintendent, Danapur, for fresh adjudication, directing a thorough consideration of the petitioner's contentions and completion of proceedings within three months from receipt of the order. The petition was allowed by way of remand, ensuring adherence to procedural fairness and statutory requirements.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4881 
