Refund claim dismissed as time-barred under s.142(5); non-obstante clause read restrictively, merits not decided, self-assessment payments not mere de...
Page of 4819
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
9201 to 9220 of 96365 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 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 
TaxTMI 
of 4819 
Join Channel 
