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 held that electronic communication of the impugned order (email) satisfied service requirements under Section 169 CGST and that delay in uploading Form DRC-07 or portal posting did not render the order time-barred. The court found prima facie service by email sufficient despite multiple noticees and considerable ITC allegations. The impugned order was declared appealable; the Petitioner was permitted to file statutory appeals under Section 107 CGST by 30 September 2025 with the requisite pre-deposit. If filed within that period, the appeals shall not be dismissed on limitation grounds and shall be adjudicated on merits. Petition disposed.
The HC held that electronic communication of the impugned order (email) satisfied service requirements under Section 169 CGST and that delay in uploading Form DRC-07 or portal posting did not render the order time-barred. The court found prima facie service by email sufficient despite multiple noticees and considerable ITC allegations. The impugned order was declared appealable; the Petitioner was permitted to file statutory appeals under Section 107 CGST by 30 September 2025 with the requisite pre-deposit. If filed within that period, the appeals shall not be dismissed on limitation grounds and shall be adjudicated on merits. Petition disposed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.