Interactive touchscreen panels with integrated computing functions fall under automatic data-processing machines rather than display monitors for cust...
Ex parte injunction service requirements were substantially met, while civil recovery and SFIO investigation into provident fund defalcation continued...
Enforcement of resolution-plan directions continues without a Supreme Court stay, preventing suspension of redistribution and escrowed-fund distributi...
Third-party ownership claims over attached property require Special Court adjudication where purchasers lack registered sale deeds and bona fides rema...
Pure-agent reimbursements in clearing and forwarding services are excluded from taxable value when qualifying third-party payments are properly record...
Customs relief for Strait of Hormuz maritime disruptions remains available, with existing conditions continuing unchanged through the extended validit...
The HC held that the adjudicating authority's cancellation of the petitioner's GST registration violated principles of natural justice because no show-cause notice or detailed reasons were furnished, rendering the impugned order cryptic and unsustainable. The court further determined that under section 107(11) the appellate authority lacks power to remit the matter back to the adjudicating authority for a "second inning"; having concluded the original order could not be sustained, the appellate remand was unjustified. Accordingly, the HC set aside the portion of the impugned appellate order remanding the matter to the Assistant/Deputy Commissioner and quashed the subsequent order; petition allowed in favor of the petitioner.
The HC held that the adjudicating authority's cancellation of the petitioner's GST registration violated principles of natural justice because no show-cause notice or detailed reasons were furnished, rendering the impugned order cryptic and unsustainable. The court further determined that under section 107(11) the appellate authority lacks power to remit the matter back to the adjudicating authority for a "second inning"; having concluded the original order could not be sustained, the appellate remand was unjustified. Accordingly, the HC set aside the portion of the impugned appellate order remanding the matter to the Assistant/Deputy Commissioner and quashed the subsequent order; petition allowed in favor of the petitioner.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.