Patent-settlement expenditure treated as commercially expedient revenue outlay, with foreign-law restrictions inapplicable before the prospective amen...
International transaction benchmarking restricts transfer pricing adjustments to associated-enterprise dealings, while functional comparability govern...
Joint development agreements defer taxable transfer where possession lacks part performance, while completed flats determine consideration and exempti...
Passenger baggage re-export requires true declaration and cannot be granted indirectly through discretionary redemption of undeclared prohibited goods...
Page of 4803
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
501 to 520 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 dismissed the petitioner's writ petition for relief against an adjudication order under the GST Act, holding the challenge barred by delay and laches. The court found the petitioner failed to explain an approximately 11-month delay in seeking writ relief against an order dated 21 August 2024 and declined to exercise discretionary writ jurisdiction, notwithstanding that Section 73(10) limits adjudication timeframes. The HC observed the availability of alternative statutory remedies under the GST regime and directed that factual and legal disputes concerning understatement in GSTR-3B vis-Ã -vis GSTR-1 be agitated before the competent adjudicating authority. Petition dismissed; no interference granted.
The HC dismissed the petitioner's writ petition for relief against an adjudication order under the GST Act, holding the challenge barred by delay and laches. The court found the petitioner failed to explain an approximately 11-month delay in seeking writ relief against an order dated 21 August 2024 and declined to exercise discretionary writ jurisdiction, notwithstanding that Section 73(10) limits adjudication timeframes. The HC observed the availability of alternative statutory remedies under the GST regime and directed that factual and legal disputes concerning understatement in GSTR-3B vis-Ã -vis GSTR-1 be agitated before the competent adjudicating authority. Petition dismissed; no interference granted.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.