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...
The HC dismissed the writ petition challenging suspension of the Assistant Commissioner of State Tax and declined to adjudicate the merits of alleged negligence in failing to act on an adverse report concerning a fictitious input tax credit claim by a bogus firm. The Court held that disciplinary and fact-finding proceedings fall within the disciplinary authority's domain and, under Article 226, it will not usurp that jurisdiction to determine factual disputes. The petition was disposed of with a direction that the disciplinary authority complete the disciplinary inquiry within three months from receipt of the certified copy of this order, thereby preserving the authority's power to adjudicate misconduct and potential departmental action.
The HC dismissed the writ petition challenging suspension of the Assistant Commissioner of State Tax and declined to adjudicate the merits of alleged negligence in failing to act on an adverse report concerning a fictitious input tax credit claim by a bogus firm. The Court held that disciplinary and fact-finding proceedings fall within the disciplinary authority's domain and, under Article 226, it will not usurp that jurisdiction to determine factual disputes. The petition was disposed of with a direction that the disciplinary authority complete the disciplinary inquiry within three months from receipt of the certified copy of this order, thereby preserving the authority's power to adjudicate misconduct and potential departmental action.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4790
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
