Transaction value rejection requires reliable corroboration; refundable VAT is excluded and temporary registration does not defeat new-vehicle exempti...
Appellate jurisdiction remains available where a wrist-worn gold ornament cannot conclusively be characterised as imported baggage at the preliminary ...
Written complaint requirement bars cognizance on police reports for securities offences, while unsupported breach of trust and cheating allegations fa...
The HC allowed the petition and remanded the matter to the first appellate authority with directions to treat the amount deposited by the petitioner under protest as the mandatory pre-deposit under Section 107(6) of the GST Act. The court held that, absent evidence that the protested deposit had been quantified or adjusted against other liabilities, the protested sum is available for adjustment against the 10% pre-deposit requirement and must be accepted to permit institution of the appeal. The first appellate authority was directed to accept the protested deposit as pre-deposit and decide the appeal on merits by passing a reasoned and speaking order in accordance with law.
The HC allowed the petition and remanded the matter to the first appellate authority with directions to treat the amount deposited by the petitioner under protest as the mandatory pre-deposit under Section 107(6) of the GST Act. The court held that, absent evidence that the protested deposit had been quantified or adjusted against other liabilities, the protested sum is available for adjustment against the 10% pre-deposit requirement and must be accepted to permit institution of the appeal. The first appellate authority was directed to accept the protested deposit as pre-deposit and decide the appeal on merits by passing a reasoned and speaking order in accordance with law.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.