Necessary-party requirements limit impleadment of independent entities, while deferred consideration does not create an appealable adverse determinati...
Food supplement classification requires common parlance and authoritative tests, preventing treatment as proprietary Ayurvedic medicines without suppo...
Specified regulatory authority income receives conditional tax exemption, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income character, and return f...
Tax exemption for regulatory authority income applies retrospectively, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and return-filing...
Input tax credit conditions remain constitutionally valid, with eligible recipient claims considered under GST circulars and retrospective filing dead...
Page of 4786
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
401 to 420 of 95714 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 filed by A against the adjudication order passed under S.73 of the GST Act on the ground of non-maintainability. It held that a statutory appellate remedy under S.107 was available and the appellate authority's power to condone delay is strictly confined to an additional thirty days beyond the initial three-month limitation, with no jurisdiction to extend it further. The impugned order dated 22.10.2024 was challenged only on 23.10.2025, with no sufficient cause pleaded for not availing the appellate remedy or for the belated approach to the HC. The HC found that A sought to circumvent the statutory scheme and therefore refused to exercise its writ jurisdiction under Arts.226/227.
The HC dismissed the writ petition filed by A against the adjudication order passed under S.73 of the GST Act on the ground of non-maintainability. It held that a statutory appellate remedy under S.107 was available and the appellate authority's power to condone delay is strictly confined to an additional thirty days beyond the initial three-month limitation, with no jurisdiction to extend it further. The impugned order dated 22.10.2024 was challenged only on 23.10.2025, with no sufficient cause pleaded for not availing the appellate remedy or for the belated approach to the HC. The HC found that A sought to circumvent the statutory scheme and therefore refused to exercise its writ jurisdiction under Arts.226/227.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4786
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
