Business expenditure deduction requires proof of genuine commission payments and commercial allowability; turnover growth alone cannot validate the cl...
Article 8 treaty coverage excluded third-party airline support services, while documented demonetisation cash receipts remained accepted business inco...
Functional comparability under TNMM requires highway contract benchmarks to reflect operation, maintenance and transfer activities, requiring fresh be...
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 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
