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...
Insolvency professional agency governance rules amended to add nominee directors, tighten independent director eligibility, and regulate managing dire...
The HC declined to entertain the writ, finding matters of alleged fraudulent availment of input tax credit ordinarily unsuitable for writ jurisdiction where complex factual and evidentiary inquiries and the protection of the public exchequer require exhaustion of statutory remedies. The Court held the Petitioner had received notices and filed responses, raised no substantive merits other than non-supply of RUDs, and was relegated to the statutory appellate route under s.107, CGST. The Petitioner is directed to file the appeal with the requisite pre-deposit by 30 November 2025; if so filed, the appeal will be admitted and not dismissed as time-barred. Petition disposed.
The HC declined to entertain the writ, finding matters of alleged fraudulent availment of input tax credit ordinarily unsuitable for writ jurisdiction where complex factual and evidentiary inquiries and the protection of the public exchequer require exhaustion of statutory remedies. The Court held the Petitioner had received notices and filed responses, raised no substantive merits other than non-supply of RUDs, and was relegated to the statutory appellate route under s.107, CGST. The Petitioner is directed to file the appeal with the requisite pre-deposit by 30 November 2025; if so filed, the appeal will be admitted and not dismissed as time-barred. Petition disposed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.