Jurisdictional facts in certificate-of-origin discrepancies can support customs show-cause proceedings, leaving factual explanations for departmental ...
Market value for captive electricity consumption follows industrial consumer tariffs, supporting profit computation for the power generation deduction...
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.