Online bond platforms may offer overseas-regulated products and tax-specific bonds subject to disclosures, compliance safeguards and revised complianc...
Corporate guarantee valuation permits actual ascertainable commission while barring retroactive application and extended-period penalties for bona fid...
Proper-officer jurisdiction under UPGST penalty provisions upheld; participation on merits prevents bypassing the statutory appellate remedy through w...
Transitioned CENVAT credit may validly satisfy mandatory pre-deposit requirements for legacy service tax appeals through Electronic Credit Ledger debi...
Building-plan sanction charges require statutory authority; unauthorised fees and GST were quashed, while labour cess must follow prescribed collectio...
Pure-agent exclusion fails where hotel booking facilitators receive third-party services themselves, making entire customer consideration taxable as r...
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.
TaxTMI 
of 4800
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
