Transaction value rejection requires reliable corroboration; refundable VAT is excluded and temporary registration does not defeat new-vehicle exempti...
Appellate jurisdiction remains available where a wrist-worn gold ornament cannot conclusively be characterised as imported baggage at the preliminary ...
Page of 4803
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
381 to 400 of 96046 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 upheld the cancellation of the petitioner's GST registration under Section 29(2)(c) of the CGST Act, 2017, due to non-filing of returns for six continuous months. However, relying on the proviso to sub-rule (4) of Rule 22 of the CGST Rules, 2017, the Court held that if the petitioner submits all pending returns and pays the outstanding tax along with interest and late fees, the empowered officer has jurisdiction to drop cancellation proceedings and restore registration by issuing Form GST REG-20. The writ petition was disposed of with a directive that the petitioner may approach the competent authority within two months to seek restoration of GST registration upon compliance with the prescribed formalities.
The HC upheld the cancellation of the petitioner's GST registration under Section 29(2)(c) of the CGST Act, 2017, due to non-filing of returns for six continuous months. However, relying on the proviso to sub-rule (4) of Rule 22 of the CGST Rules, 2017, the Court held that if the petitioner submits all pending returns and pays the outstanding tax along with interest and late fees, the empowered officer has jurisdiction to drop cancellation proceedings and restore registration by issuing Form GST REG-20. The writ petition was disposed of with a directive that the petitioner may approach the competent authority within two months to seek restoration of GST registration upon compliance with the prescribed formalities.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.