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" ?
HC examined challenge to an appellate order setting aside a refund sanction relating to alleged zero-rated export of services under the IGST Act, 2017. HC held that the appellate authority had acted in violation of principles of natural justice, having failed to apply its mind or record adequate reasons, particularly regarding classification of services as exports and the applicability of s.13(3)-(13) IGST Act. Concluding that the impugned order was vitiated by non-application of mind, HC set it aside. The matter was remanded to the appellate authority for de novo consideration, with a direction to pass a reasoned order after granting due notice and hearing to the petitioner, who shall appear on 27.10.2025.
HC examined challenge to an appellate order setting aside a refund sanction relating to alleged zero-rated export of services under the IGST Act, 2017. HC held that the appellate authority had acted in violation of principles of natural justice, having failed to apply its mind or record adequate reasons, particularly regarding classification of services as exports and the applicability of s.13(3)-(13) IGST Act. Concluding that the impugned order was vitiated by non-application of mind, HC set it aside. The matter was remanded to the appellate authority for de novo consideration, with a direction to pass a reasoned order after granting due notice and hearing to the petitioner, who shall appear on 27.10.2025.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4803
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
