Independent show-cause notices remain separate proceedings, while customs adjudication challenges should ordinarily follow the statutory appellate rem...
Institutional incapacity in customs settlement proceedings excludes non-functional quorum periods from statutory disposal timelines, preventing automa...
Interactive touchscreen panels with integrated computing functions fall under automatic data-processing machines rather than display monitors for cust...
Ex parte injunction service requirements were substantially met, while civil recovery and SFIO investigation into provident fund defalcation continued...
Enforcement of resolution-plan directions continues without a Supreme Court stay, preventing suspension of redistribution and escrowed-fund distributi...
Third-party ownership claims over attached property require Special Court adjudication where purchasers lack registered sale deeds and bona fides rema...
Pure-agent reimbursements in clearing and forwarding services are excluded from taxable value when qualifying third-party payments are properly record...
Page of 4798
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
341 to 360 of 95957 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 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.
TaxTMI 
of 4798
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
