Opportunity to respond to jurisdictional reports is mandatory before customs settlement duty enhancement; connected applications require consistent ad...
Specific customs headings for scaffolding components prevail over general classification, invalidating misclassification proceedings and enabling with...
Liquidator appointment under Section 34 requires consideration of creditor recommendations, valid professional authorisation, and preservation of vali...
Income-tax exemption for specified regulatory fees and government grants applies subject to non-commercial activity and continuing compliance conditio...
Digital accessibility audit and remediation deadlines extended, while all other disability-compliance obligations for regulated entities remain unchan...
Page of 4803
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
621 to 640 of 96047 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
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.