Specialized Investment Fund distribution now requires dedicated certification, while transitional recognition preserves existing qualified distributor...
Overlapping GST proceedings require Central and State authorities to designate one competent authority for coordinated adjudication of the same matter...
Composite healthcare supplies retain exemption when patient care is the contract's essential character, despite payment through an implementing agency...
The HC held that the petition is not maintainable insofar as the petitioner failed to show that the officer exercising Section 129(3) of the CGST Act lacked jurisdiction or that "specifying the penalty payable" requires assessment of goods and valuation prior to its specification; prima facie the petitioner did not cooperate in proceedings under Section 129. The writ petition is disposed of with the petitioner directed to exhaust the remedy of appeal before the appellate authority within one month of receipt of the order. The appellate authority is requested to decide the memorandum of appeal within a reasonable period, namely three months from receipt. No stay was granted.
The HC held that the petition is not maintainable insofar as the petitioner failed to show that the officer exercising Section 129(3) of the CGST Act lacked jurisdiction or that "specifying the penalty payable" requires assessment of goods and valuation prior to its specification; prima facie the petitioner did not cooperate in proceedings under Section 129. The writ petition is disposed of with the petitioner directed to exhaust the remedy of appeal before the appellate authority within one month of receipt of the order. The appellate authority is requested to decide the memorandum of appeal within a reasonable period, namely three months from receipt. No stay was granted.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.