Patent-settlement expenditure treated as commercially expedient revenue outlay, with foreign-law restrictions inapplicable before the prospective amen...
International transaction benchmarking restricts transfer pricing adjustments to associated-enterprise dealings, while functional comparability govern...
Joint development agreements defer taxable transfer where possession lacks part performance, while completed flats determine consideration and exempti...
The HC allowed the petition, holding that the earlier dismissal of the Appellant's appeal was purely procedural for failure to make the mandatory 7.5% pre-deposit and not a merits adjudication; consequently the adjudicating Authority was not functus officio upon subsequent deposit. The impugned order of the Commissioner (Appeals), CGST & Central Excise, Ranchi dated 17.01.2024 is set aside, the appeal is restored to its original number and remitted for adjudication on merits. The decision clarifies that procedural non-compliance resulting in non-entertainment does not extinguish the Appellant's substantive right to appellate adjudication once procedural requirements are satisfied.
The HC allowed the petition, holding that the earlier dismissal of the Appellant's appeal was purely procedural for failure to make the mandatory 7.5% pre-deposit and not a merits adjudication; consequently the adjudicating Authority was not functus officio upon subsequent deposit. The impugned order of the Commissioner (Appeals), CGST & Central Excise, Ranchi dated 17.01.2024 is set aside, the appeal is restored to its original number and remitted for adjudication on merits. The decision clarifies that procedural non-compliance resulting in non-entertainment does not extinguish the Appellant's substantive right to appellate adjudication once procedural requirements are satisfied.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4803
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
