Retention of seized property survives where recorded reasons support proceeds of crime, while stayed investigation periods are excluded from limitatio...
Specified income of Baddi Barotiwala Nalagarh Development Authority receives conditional tax exemption, retrospectively covering its designated assess...
Specified development authority income receives retrospective tax exemption, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and return-...
Unified Brand India framework introduces voluntary Trust Mark certification and funding support for export branding, packaging and global promotional ...
Origin Declaration authentication governs preferential tariff claims under India-UK CETA, requiring a validated reference number before import clearan...
Separate assessment orders for different years remain valid when distinct notices and hearing opportunities prevent prejudice from combined proceeding...
The HC dismissed the petitions on maintainability grounds, emphasizing the availability of an alternate and efficacious remedy by way of appeal. The court held that no patent breach of natural justice occurred, as the petitioners were served with show-cause notices and participated in the proceedings without raising the denial of hearing issue earlier. The refusal of adjournment did not amount to prejudice or a violation warranting departure from the rule of exhausting alternate remedies. The petitioners were granted liberty to file appeals against the impugned orders within six weeks, with a directive that the appellate authority consider the appeals on merits without raising limitation objections, given the bona fide prosecution of the petitions within limitation. The petitions were accordingly disposed of.
The HC dismissed the petitions on maintainability grounds, emphasizing the availability of an alternate and efficacious remedy by way of appeal. The court held that no patent breach of natural justice occurred, as the petitioners were served with show-cause notices and participated in the proceedings without raising the denial of hearing issue earlier. The refusal of adjournment did not amount to prejudice or a violation warranting departure from the rule of exhausting alternate remedies. The petitioners were granted liberty to file appeals against the impugned orders within six weeks, with a directive that the appellate authority consider the appeals on merits without raising limitation objections, given the bona fide prosecution of the petitions within limitation. The petitions were accordingly disposed of.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
