Admissibility of electronic evidence bars undervaluation demands where printouts, retracted statements and no cross-examination leave the case unprove...
Limitation in oppression and mismanagement proceedings: prior knowledge of removal and dilution barred the challenge, with valuation directions upheld...
The HC granted partial relief to the petitioner challenging an order under s.73 of the GST enactments, noting the petitioner had not preferred an appellate remedy but had declared and paid CGST and SGST in the annual return (GSTR-9) prior to the impugned order. The HC quashed the impugned order dated 22.02.2025 and remitted the matter to the respondent for fresh adjudication on merits within three months of receipt of the order. The remand is conditional: the petitioner must comply with the conditions imposed by the court. The petition is disposed of by way of remand, leaving the respondent to pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.
The HC granted partial relief to the petitioner challenging an order under s.73 of the GST enactments, noting the petitioner had not preferred an appellate remedy but had declared and paid CGST and SGST in the annual return (GSTR-9) prior to the impugned order. The HC quashed the impugned order dated 22.02.2025 and remitted the matter to the respondent for fresh adjudication on merits within three months of receipt of the order. The remand is conditional: the petitioner must comply with the conditions imposed by the court. The petition is disposed of by way of remand, leaving the respondent to pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4817 
Join Channel 
